Smokers fume as prices jump ahead of fed tax hike

[Robbien]

Source: Reno Gazette-Journal

Debbie Winningham of Red Rock knew that the federal cigarette tax was set to go up 61 cents a pack on April 1, but when she walked into the Indian Smoke Shop on East Second Street this week, she said she "nearly had a stroke."
Advertisement

It was sticker shock: Cigarettes had gone up about $5 a carton or so, depending on the brand.

The era of the 25-cent cigarette has arrived weeks early as big tobacco companies bumped up prices in anticipation of next month's federal tax increase. A carton of Marlboro, selling at a discount shop (sales tax added) for about $39 two weeks ago, now is about $44. Other stores now are charging $5 to $7 a pack for brand name cigarettes, even as the Nevada Legislature considers a bill that would tack on another $1 a pack in state taxes to the 80 cents already charged.

The latest price increase has smokers fuming.

"I saw Kools for nearly $50 a carton. That's crazy," Winningham said. "The cigarette companies not only raised the prices in advance to cover the tax, but they added their cut, too. They are taking advantage of the situation."

Thomas G. Clayton of Sparks said he noticed the cigarette price increase at a 7-Eleven last weekend. The clerk told him the tax already was in effect, which he said he knew wasn't true. He drove to other stores and found the same price increases but said clerks had different theories about why the price rose weeks in advance of the new tax.

Read more: http://www.rgj.com/article/20090319/NEWS/903190345/1321

---

On April 1st, a roll your own cigarette place price is going up from $10.95 per carton to $24.95 per carton.

With make your own more than doubling, the price of the factory made carton of Kools that guy in Winningham is now complaining about will far exceed that fifty bucks/carton which has his knickers in a twist right now.

Cigarette smokers in the US is an endangered species.

[Andy823]

1. I stopped smoking

When the price hit .55 cents a pack! Guess that shows just how old I am!

I know how hard it is to stop, tried several times before I finally stopped, but with prices like this I would agree with you, smoking isn't long for this world, which is a good thing if one really thinks about it! Save money, and your life! Sounds like a winner to me! :shrug:

[HysteryDiagnosis]

2. Perhaps a better choice than using that chemical infested crap

Philip Morris pushes.



http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=how+to+grow+tobacco+plants&btnG=Google+Search&aq=0&oq=how+to+grow+tobacco

[marketcrazy1]

5. I roll my own

cost less than a buck a pack. I have been stocking up on tobacco, I have 10 pounds, enough for 25 cartons, cost less than 150 bucks at sixty bucks a carton i have saved myself over 1200 dollars.......

[Titonwan]

10. Ditto

I bought 20 pounds at $10.65 a pound and a case (50 cartons of tubes). I'm good for a year (or three) and I already know how to grow tobacco, so I'm set until my plants are dried and graded.
I'M REEOOTCH BEEOOTCH! There's 96 year old ladies in Russian smoking non filtereds. That tells me it's the chemicals that are killing people. Gotta die from something, anyway.

[Paladin]

21. Gee, That's Really Great.

All that money you're saving can be put toward a few days of your hospice care, maybe a nice big spray of flowers for your casket. And if you gotta die from something, hey, why not something easy like lung cancer, right?

[Runcible Spoon]

22. Would you like to post all of your habits for critique?

:shrug: Being a righteous asshole results in higher healthcare costs for those around you...blood pressure meds, therapy, self-medication...

[Paladin]

25. Yeah, There's One Personal Habit I'll Admit To You:

I don't engage in extended dialogs with jerks who lend support to a spectacularly moronic habit like cigarette smoking. Mea fucking culpa. Hey, if people want to smoke, it's fine with me; in the long run it improves the gene pool...

[SOS]

85. "It improves the gene pool"

Yeah.
The "gene pool" has been irrevocably damaged by smokers, such as:

Albert Einstein
Thomas Alva Edison
Alexander Graham Bell
Edwin Hubble
Winston Churchill
Bill Clinton
FDR
George Orwell
Oscar Wilde
Jean Paul Sartre
Mark Twain
Albert Camus
Bertolt Brecht
Kurt Vonnegut
Van Gogh
Alfred Hitchcock
Monet
Picasso
Mondriaan

But Bush is a non-smoker, so it'll all even out.

[Paladin]

86. Sartre Was A Smoker?

Well shit, I guess that settles it---I'm off to hussle up a carton of no-filter Gitanes. If Jean Paul liked 'em, that's good enough for me. Gotta match?

And just think of what a great president Dubya would have been, if he'd just gotten hooked on smokes the way Laura did. Such a shame....

[SOS]

89. And yet the "improving the gene pool" comment remains

Careful, though, Sartre only lived to 75.

[Solitaire]

136. LOL!!!

You go!! I loved this comment from SOS - smart guy/girl!

:)

[ConcernedCanuk]

26. LOL - "Being a righteous asshole results in higher healthcare costs for those around you "

.
.
.

still :rofl:

:thumbsup:

[Abacus]

29. Better that than from sucking down your car exhaust every day on my bike ride to work.

(I'm not the one you responded to, but I hate assholery.)

[Abq_Sarah]

33. You ought to be thanking the smokers

Who the hell do you think is funding the new SCHIP expansion?

[Mauibob]

135. Who the hell do you think is funding the new SCHIP expansion?

Not me, received my first shipment of cigarettes from Russia last week. Not as good, but my cigarettes cost $57 a carton here and $17 from Russia. Sweet. Thanks Congress, you now gave me 2 major tax rebates. If interested just google cigarettes and you will find a lot ofcompanies selling from Eastern Europe.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

56. You're a big ball of sunshine, aren't you?

[sweetladybug]

65. Paladin, you sound very judgmental toward smokers

Smokers are being targeted and treated like crap now. Next it will be the fat people that eat to much chocolate, fatty food and sugar (then the government will be adding extra taxes onto these items). Then the skinny people will be targeted (then the government will be adding extra taxes onto low fat items and diet items.) Then the people who drink any kind of liquor (then the government will be adding extra on these items. Are you in any of these groups of people? If so, I hope you are looking forward to being treated like crap by others just because they don't live the way you do.

[Paladin]

69. I Have No Problem With People Smoking, As Long As They Keep It To Themselves

But the moment smokers start squealing about not being able to inflict their destructive habit on others, whenever and wherever the hell they want to, I develop a really bad attitude. Particularly when they attempt to don martyrs' garments and try to elicit public sympathy, as if they're some sort of oppressed minority. Smokers need to accept their habit for what it is: an increasingly unpopular practice that is worthy of very little in the way of public support or protection. If that makes me judgmental or an asshole, I can live with that....

[joshcryer]

112. You act as if smoking courtesy doesn't exist.

You exist in your own little world. There are dozens of smokers you probably don't see on a given day who keep their windows rolled up in their car, or who put out their cigarette, or who avoid people when they see them coming their way as to not "offend."

If a child ever went near me while I was smoking it would be out in an instant, 30 yards away.

[Paladin]

114. "My Own Little World" Is Currently Colorado.

And there's damned sure some smoking courtesy here---it's virtually banned in public places, notably restaurants. As it ought to be. Personal courtesy only gets you so far, whether its smoking, cell phones, driving, or any number of other things.....

[anigbrowl]

101. So? He's right

I smoke, though not much any more. It's stupid, i'm ashamed of it, I have no problem with a tax increase. These 'oh noes government is gonna oppress everybody' posts are laughable. It's just a way of rationalizing your addiction and getting your mind of the sad state of your lungs.

spoiler alert: you'll remember this neck time you hack up a big wet one.

[Seldona]

67. An immortal?

You are aware you are going to die as well, no? Will that be free?

[santamargarita]

11. I do the same thing! I've stocked enough tobacco to last 6 months

I have an electric machine and a hand crank - takes me about 15 minutes a day. Been doing this over a year and saved a small fortune.

[marketcrazy1]

13. I can roll 3 packs with my hand lever machine

in 15 minutes......

[santamargarita]

18. The electric machine will do that, but not as good of quality as the hand crank

I only make 2 packs a day and usually have a few left over.

[radfringe]

50. we've been doing the same

have a nice machine... set up in front of the TV and roll the cigs while watching KO and RM....

[ohheckyeah]

99. Could you recommend a website to buy

supplies?

[joshcryer]

109. Ditto this, please post info about this.

I wouldn't mind "backsliding." :)

Just isn't worth it anymore.

[CreekDog]

3. i hope they boycott cigarettes

that would be an appropriate response. :D

[Rage for Order]

4. It's getting ridiculous

Democrats (supposedly) fight for the little guy, the common man, the working man, right? Certainly they are aware that the less education one has, and the less money one makes, the more likely one is to smoke. Smoking rates are inversely proportional to income and education level. This being the case, why did they choose to levy an onerous tax on those who are least able to afford it? Instead of increasing taxes on cigarettes by $1 a pack, why not levy a $1 tax on every bottle of wine sold in the US? I can assure you that affluent people drink a lot more wine than do people who don't make much money. Maybe they're simply protecting poor people from themselves? :shrug:

One other thing: what happens when large numbers of smokers quit as smoking gets more and more cost prohibitive? Where will the funds come from to fund SCHIP? Who will they go after next?

And no, I don't smoke

[Robbien]

9. Exactly. It is surprising how much clout the tobacco lobby has lost

but maybe not so surprising. Smoking has been relegated to the lower classes and this doubling of price is okay in the public mind because smoking has been branded as a low class thing to do.

Doubling alcohol tax, well that's another matter.

I am a tree hugging, labor loving peace-nik who also doesn't smoke. Sure do recognize a regressive tax when I see one 'though.

[wickerwoman]

93. Smoking is a luxury.

It's not necessary for human survival (quite the opposite) and therefore taxing it is not a "regressive" tax in the same way that a sales tax on food or clothing is.

I don't think smoking is a "low class" thing to do. It's a stupid, self-destructive thing to do. Selfish too... I can't tell you how many shanty Irish families of my parents' generation couldn't put clothes on their kids' backs or food in their mouths but always found money for cigarettes and booze.

Sorry, but I don't really see the tragedy of poor families not being able to afford cigarettes. Worst case scenario is that they quit (and hey, cost less to treat for lung cancer in ten years).

[pipoman]

96. Maybe you also don't care that

those poor, selfish parents will be less able to feed their dirty faced brats now. Who cares, huh?

[wickerwoman]

97. Yes, exactly.

Not sad that people have to pay more for cigarettes = gleeful that children will starve

Because, of course, being pissed at parents who spend money on cigarettes instead of their kids translates directly into total indifference to hungry children.

:thumbsdown:

[pipoman]

98. My point is that you said yourself

I can't tell you how many shanty Irish families of my parents' generation couldn't put clothes on their kids' backs or food in their mouths but always found money for cigarettes and booze.

Price didn't stop them huh? Followed by

Sorry, but I don't really see the tragedy of poor families not being able to afford cigarettes. Worst case scenario is that they quit (and hey, cost less to treat for lung cancer in ten years).

And I believe worst case scenario is that families who are already unable to adequately feed and clothe their children will continue to smoke at the kids expense. In the past tax increases on cigarettes has not dramatically decreased smoking only burdened people who can least afford it.

[wickerwoman]

100. Price might have stopped them,

who knows? That's the point.

http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/11/suppl_1/i62

A study of tobacco companies findings on price elasticity and the relationship between cigarette price and smoking prevalence:

"Related to this are many documents that describe the impact of state tax increases on cigarette smoking within a given state. For example, two documents from Philip Morris described the impact of the 1989 increase in the California cigarette excise tax from 10 cents to 35 cents per pack; one of these also includes a discussion of the impact of the New York tax increase of May 1989 which raised the state tax by 12 cents... Significant declines were observed in response to both state tax increases. Based on data from a Nielsen panel, total industry cigarette sales in California declined by 7.6% for the period from January through August 1989, compared to the prior year. Similarly, New York sales declined 6.2% from May 1989 through August 1989...

Similarly, a 1994 report prepared by SE Surveys, Inc for Lorillard described the findings from a study of three tracking surveys of Michigan smokers (from a statewide sample, a sample from the Grand Rapids marketing area, and a sample of black smokers) that looked at the impact of the 50 cent increase in the Michigan cigarette excise tax on 1 May 1994. The study reported that two months after the tax increase, there was a significant reduction in the number of smokers in all three samples, with the number of smokers in the statewide sample falling by 7%, in the Grand Rapids marketing area falling by 10%, and among blacks falling by 4%.

These experiences in California, New York, and Michigan, where higher prices resulting from increased cigarette taxes led to significant reductions in the number of smokers, confirmed the findings of a national survey done by The Roper Organization Inc, on behalf of the Tobacco Institute in 1978. Among the many questions asked in the survey was a series of questions asking smokers whether or not they would continue to smoke after tax increases of 5 cents, 50 cents, and $1. In response, 93% of all smokers indicated that they would continue smoking after a 5 cent per pack tax increase, while 62% and 41% said the same after tax increases of 50 cents and $1, respectively.

These documents clearly support the findings from academic and other research that demonstrate that price is a key determinant of overall cigarette smoking, ***that price increases lead to significant reductions in overall smoking, increases in smoking cessation, and reductions in smoking prevalence, with relatively large effects on young people***...The tobacco industry's own internal documents confirm the effectiveness of large cigarette excise tax increases as a potent policy for governments in their efforts to reduce tobacco use, particularly among the young."

Families who can't feed or clothe their children can take advantage of government safety net programs like food stamps and WIC. There's no reason we should hold off on increasing cigarette prices because some parents choose to smoke instead of take care of their families despite the very obvious health and economic disadvantages of doing so. Again, smoking is a luxury, not a necessity. It is not a regressive tax policy to tax luxury items. Is it regressive to tax SUVs because some people would rather go into massive debt to buy a gratuitous status symbol than feed and clothe their children on the salary that they actually earn? Is it regressive to tax gold and diamonds because gangsta baby daddy would rather buy bling than diapers?

[Rage for Order]

103. There's something they may not have considered

If there weren't corresponding tax increases in neighboring states, some of the sales lost in states that increased taxes probably went to border towns in neighboring states. Also, it begs the question: if the tax increase does get people to quit smoking in large numbers, where will the funding come from for the SCHIP program that the tax increase was implemented to fund?

[wickerwoman]

119. From later in the same article:

"These were the first studies to use individual level data from national surveys to look at *how smoking among different population subgroups* responded to cigarette prices. The study on teens used data from cycle III of the Health Examination Survey from the late 1960s, and estimated that the price elasticity of teenage smoking participation was -1.20, while the overall price elasticity of teen smoking was -1.44."

They were studying smoking prevalence among individual groups, not looking at raw sales numbers. They found that for each 10% increase in sales price 12-14% of young smokers quit (and 4-7% of older smokers). Since almost all nicotine addicts form the addiction before the age of 25 and younger kids have less spare money to buy cigarettes, they conclude that taxing cigarettes is a potent way to reduce the number of future addicts.

I'm sure other funding can be found for SCHIP once the tobacco revenue dries up. Maybe we can start taxing the hell out of McDonalds or extreme sports or finally crack down on companies that dump sludge into the air and water. In any case, I don't think we really want to encourage and enable smoking just so we can continue to have a revenue stream for SCHIP.

[pipoman]

113. I was going to let it go until I came to this last paragraph

Families who can't feed or clothe their children can take advantage of government safety net programs like food stamps and WIC.

Not all poor qualify for these programs and they certainly don't increase standard of living, they are bare necessity programs.

There's no reason we should hold off on increasing cigarette prices because some parents choose to smoke instead of take care of their families despite the very obvious health and economic disadvantages of doing so. Again, smoking is a luxury, not a necessity.

This is very elitist sounding. Smoking was a choice when people start smoking, it soon becomes an addiction not unlike heroin or cocaine addiction. I have been addicted to cocaine years ago, I quit, cigarettes are more difficult IMO.

To liken cigarette addiction to SUVs and gold and diamonds simply shows lack of understanding of the problem and insensitivity for the addicts. Ever seen a person with emphysema on oxygen who sneaks cigarettes? I have. What about a pregnant woman who continues to smoke even though she would like to quit? I have. This is a completely different problem than SUVs.

Maybe the SCHIP (State Children's Health Insurance Program) should be funded by, oh I don't know, EVERYBODY? And if taxes must be increased on cigarettes the money be used for sorely lacking chemical dependency recovery programs including cigarette addiction. Currently the only cigarette addiction assistance available are a website and brochures...worthless. And most states cannot assist even the people who truly want to quit using drugs and alcohol.

[wickerwoman]

118. Just answer this:

Is cigarette smoking necessary to human survival? Yes or no.

If it is not necessary to human survival, it is a luxury according to the "elitist" dictionary which we all know was written by rich white guys.
("lux·u·ry (lgzh-r, lksh-)
n. pl. lux·u·ries
1. Something inessential but conducive to pleasure and comfort.")

If it is not necessary to human survival, taxing it is not regressive any more than taxing cocaine or meth or pot would be regressive just because some people choose to spend their money on that rather than real necessities. And it is a choice, otherwise all addicts would be wasting their time trying to quit. Is that what you're saying?

[ohheckyeah]

123. Yes, it is necessary to the

survival of the humans around me. You wouldn't ask that question if you had ever seen me in nicotine withdrawal. :-)

[provis99]

133. ask yourself this: is car driving necessary to human survival?

No? Do you drive a car, which is destroying the entire planet's atmosphere and not just one person's health? If you drive a car, shut the fuck up about smoking.

[Titonwan]

12. Not to mention

a LOT of honest tobacco farmers. I used to live in Eastern Tennessee and this will break them and they're poor NOW. I LOVE your wine tax idea. I bet a lot of bootlegging tobacco breaks out.

[Samantha]

32. What many do not realize is that Bill Clinton originally came to DC

with part of his agenda being to stop people from smoking AND DRINKING. The alcohol lobbyists turned out to be stronger than the tobacco lobbyists, and he could only get one plank of that program off the ground. From that endeavor has sprung the idea that the HMOs and PPOs (any managed care entity) can break the public from habits it deems to be cutting into their profit margins.

Now we see how far this has come with the revelation that a House Republican is drafting legislation to ban people from growing vegetable gardens in their back yards, Farmers Markets from springing up around communities, and organic food impediments all in the name of FOOD SAFETY. FOOD SAFETY, right. Competition with the big corporations leads to legislatures implementing laws (or attempting to) that protects them from competition.

This whole thing that the Government has the right to dictate our personal habits is totally out of control. And it is only going to get worse.

Sam

[No Elephants]

40. The Clintons banned smoking from the WH, but not drinking. When challenged,

Hillary responded that tobacco was the only thing that, when used as directed, will result in death. This indicated to me that cigarettes were banned from the WH, but booze was not.

While Hillary's response flew with people less literal minded than I, it didn't make sense to me.

For one thing, cigarettes don't come with directions. Neither does booze. Both cigarettes and booze can be addictive, especially if you have an "addictive personality."

Used to excess, both cigarettes and booze can be very destructive, even fatal.

Although nothing is impossible, used In very small quantiites, neither is likely to be fatal.

Anyhoo, I didn't get the impression from Hillary's response that any part of the Clintons' mission in D.C. was to end drinking.

[Samantha]

49. I read this in the bio of Clinton's career -- The Natural

That was his goal as he approached the White House, and I was sorry to read it. I like Bill, but I think people's choices in matters such as these are purely personal and the Government should stay out of it. I include many other decisions in that batch, such as using marijuana, picking the time one wants to die when critically ill, how many children one should have, et cetera.

I am a live and let-live type of person, and I think that is loosely one of the premises this Country was founded on. The mentality that pursues us today emanating from many in political and corporate places is that Americans need to be told what decisions to make on many of these issues. To heck with that.

Sam

[NutmegYankee]

17. Wine isn't just for the wealthy

People who came from the Mediterranean drink lots of wine here in the US, and it's making a comeback among other ethnic groups as well. Why try to damage an upstart industry (East Coast in particular) that DOESN'T have enormous impacts on public health costs?

[Rage for Order]

30. It doesn't have to be a tax on wine, per se

I wasn't arguing that wine has the impact on public health that cigarettes do and, as a result, needs to be taxed more heavily. Wine was just an example of a product purchased by large numbers of people, but consumed more often by the affluent than by the poor. The $1 tax could be levied on some other product... $100 haircuts, for example. The point was that the people being hit with the $1 per pack tax increase tend to be those who can least afford to pay the additional tax, but because nicotine is so addictive many people will continue to pay the extra tax, even though they may want to quit.

[Art_from_Ark]

130. Really

You probably won't see a lot of wealthy people loading up on jugs of Gallo or Boone's Farm.

[provis99]

134. wine is for the wealthy. or arrogant yuppie snobs.

[Codeine]

23. Because wine is good for you. nt

[No Elephants]

41. Only for men and only in very small quantities. For women, even one glass daily seems harmful.

That was the most recent research I heard about. And, the benefit is in the skin of red grapes, unfermented or not For that, you don't need wine.

Easy for me to say as I crave wine only once a year or two, but that was the most recent research I heard about.

[NashVegas]

55. I Saw That. I Think It's Ridiculous

That they took such strong measures in their language on the risk factors of light/moderate drinking, compared to so much else that we do, I mean, geez. If I only live until the age of 72 instead of 78 because I had a few beers a month, fuck it.

Get real: a 6% increase in the chance of breast cancer, vs a 50% reduction in the chance of a heart attack. Get. Real.

Meanwhile, this came down the pike this morning:

People who enjoy a glass or two of wine or beer every day could be helping to keep their bones strong, new research published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition suggests.

http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTRE52J2VX20090320

[sweetladybug]

66. Wine can also cause drunkenness AND

It can effect your thinking and your reflexes. It can also be harmful to your body

[PittPoliSci]

35. it may be regressive...

but it may be the only way to get poorer folks to quit smoking.

for mine, and their own, damn good. one can still smoke in some public bars in PA.

[christx30]

64. Eh...

Everyone gets hit by taxes one way or another. We hit the rich for 40+% of their income. They hit us with tobacco taxes. And the cycle of life goes on.

[rocktivity]

6. Don't smoke and never have, but just the other day I saw cigarettes

priced from $6.50 to $8.50 per pack.

rocktivity

[Proletariatprincess]

7. Europeans are already paying more...

I think it is about $7 a pack in France and Italy where smoking cigarettes is more common than in the USA. They pay way more for gas too. Maybe we are becoming more like Europe....not a bad thing, IMHO.
(And I am a life long smoker)

[Sivafae]

79. Not true^

In 2005 in Spain a pack of cigarettes were about 2.40 Euro and in France they were twice that. I remember the exchange rate was something like $1 to 1.30 Euro. So really cigarettes were cheaper in Spain than in California.

[rainbow4321]

8. Yep...my brand went up about 25 cents overnight..over $6/pack now

There are signs up at the convenience stores I go to that say cig tax goes up 75 cents come April 1st...basically telling people to stock up now.

[Tyler Generation]

14. BOO HOO

Quit smoking if you don't like it. Why would you want to give money to an industry that thrives on killing it's customers?

[Mari333]

15. yes, I think Ill quit smoking and go out and have a

they will kill me even quicker but they arent taxed!

[Tyler Generation]

44. No one is making anyone eat bad food either

Restaurant food is taxed in my state, btw.

[Robbien]

20. We give billions to the federal government

but they are not interested in protecting us and the lives of the general public since the elite has our taxpayer funded government officials firmly in their grasp.

You are spat upon by your well funded government congresscritters and their elite benefactors but yet you make the extra effort to spit upon others in your peer group in the general population. How smart is that?

[Tyler Generation]

42. How smart is choosing the smoke?

Since, that is in fact a choice. As an individual can't fix all the corruption of my government. You make a good point, but I don't get why people make smokers out to be victims when no one is born needing to smoke. Low income people know it's just as bad as anyone else but they continue to choose to do it, and then the tax gets labeled regressive.

[sweetladybug]

68. Tyler Generation, do you drink liquor? Are you fat? Are you skinny?

If you are, people might say "BOO HOO" to you when you are the target of being treated like crap and made to pay extra taxes.

[christx30]

92. If you've been told for

30 years that putting your hand in a wood chipper was bad for you, but you did it anyway, then would you expect sympathy for having a messed up hand?
I think anyone that was born after, say, 1975 that still smokes made an informed choice after having been givin all of the information. But if they do it anyway, then they need to accept responsibility and the consequences for their own actions.
How is that a hard thing to accept? Want us to make smoking less lethal? What can we do about any of that? How about you either quit or understand that the bad things that we warned you about are true and if you continute to do it, then it's on you.

[Lorien]

74. AND giving large sums of money to the GOP

Big Tobacco is not our friend.

[sam sarrha]

16. told my co-worker complaining , "it's to pay for that Oxygen tank you'll be drag'n around soon"

[Bennyboy]

19. I quit ten days ago...

The price increased and I said fuck it. I know about five other people that have quit since then too. maybe this is all we needed.

[Abacus]

28. 22 days here

There were several reasons I finally decided to stop, the tax increase was one of them.

Good luck!

[WriteDown]

39. Selfish act...

You're denying the SCHIP program needed funds.

[christx30]

104. Please

tell me you're kidding. He should keep smoking and killing himself to pay for a government service? How about you start or increase your use to make up for the loss?

[LanternWaste]

45. My Quit Date is on Sunday...

"The price increased and I said fuck it."

My line of reasoning also. My Quit Date is on Sunday... :scared:

[Bandit]

46. Then it is working

The goal is to get people to quit and especially to get kids not to start. They are too cowardly to just make it illegal so they price it out of existence and the world is suddenly a better healthier place.

[Abacus]

59. Meh. Bologna.

I'll believe that when they start increasing taxes on food based on saturated fat content, video game consoles, and gas guzzlers. If they REALLY wanted people to quit, they'd use the revenue to help people quit.

They found a segment of the population that they could tax who would receive neither sympathy nor support, but who also happened to be addicted enough that they would pay the taxes to continue the habit anyway. The legislators wanted revenue; it was smart, but there is very little noble about it.

[joshcryer]

108. Same here, not a big deal.

[Vinnie From Indy]

24. And still not a DOLLAR to help nicotine addicts quit

I quit years ago, but I am always astonished and a bit amused by the folks that so easily spit out righteous bullshit about how others are idiots and assholes for not being able to stop ingesting one of this planest most addictive substances. I hope nobody forgets that the MOST evil aspect of the tobacco companies is their history of targeting the YOUNG to start smoking. Their own internal studies from decades ago proved that the odds of addicting someone drops precipitously after the age 21. 90+% of the smokers you will ever meet were hooked on nicotine AS KIDS!

The second biggest sin and an additional evil aspect to nicotine addiction in America in the 21st century is the lack of government/tobacco settlement money to subsidize cessation programs that include drugs and safer alternatives like gums.

[Robbien]

27. You've got that right. The people who are addicted are stuck

For the truly addicted, now what?

[totodeinhere]

129. Millions of people have successfully quit smoking.

The people who are addicted are not "stuck." It is hard to quit, but it can be done. Maybe this price hike will give some smokers the motivation they need to quit and save their lives.

[primavera]

54. Of course not

Being able to tax smokers to fund anyone and everyone's favorite pork projects without having to incur the wrath of voters by raising taxes is an invaluable asset on the Hill. Why on earth would you want to kill the golden goose?

[harpboy_ak]

31. SO QUIT.

I did. Anyone can.

Quite frankly, when single payer national health care becomes a reality, I don't want to pay the extra health care costs for tobacco addicts.

The folks whining about tobacco taxes need to quit, now.

[Tyler Generation]

43. But, but

Low income people are forced to smoke, didn't you know that!? Apparently they are so stupid and uneducated they don't know about common knowledge things like the dangers of smoking. Therefore we must coddle them and continue to defend their right to poison themselves at affordable prices!:sarcasm:

[SOS]

58. Here in NYC, low income people buy them from bootleggers

It's a huge business and growing. With cigarettes at $11 a pack, the mafia now controls the wholesale distribution.
Poor people buy from bootleggers selling out of car trunks. People with checking accounts buy from the Indian shops.

They can raise the tax to $100 a pack.
No-one around here is paying it anyway.

[christx30]

107. Not only that

but we have to fight extra taxes on them because it's wrong to tax the poor for some reason. :sarcasm:

I guess anyone that is asked to pay a little more in taxes is going to bitch about it. When it's a rich person and it's income tax, we call them selfish assholes. When it's a poor person that has to spend an extra 2 or 3 dollars on a pack of cigarettes, we call it a regressive tax and it must be stopped.

Not to come down on anyone in particular, but can you see the hypocrisy there?

[NashVegas]

52. I Haven't Had a Cigarette For Almost Two Years

And for the most part, refuse to say I've quit. The sole reason for that is because I never, ever, want to be infused with the smug, sanctimonious self-righteousness of "reformed" smokers.

[Abacus]

60. Yeah! I shouldn't have to pay health care for anyone who doesn't spend 30 minutes a day exercising,

either. What? You had a cheeseburger yesterday? That'll be another 40 cents on your premium.

[dflprincess]

73. A study out of the Netherlands last year

showed that smokers and obese people are actually cheaper to insure in the long run because they die younger. People who live healthy lifestyles run up something like $200,000 more in medical bills over the course of their longer lives and, like most everyone, their highest costs are at the end of their lives.

Besides, how are we going to fund SCHIP if people stop smoking?

[Lorien]

75. Hey, war can kill them even younger, so let's have more of those!

Besides, it's IMPORTANT to make insurance companies and war profiteers richer instead of actually allowing people to live long, healthy lives, right?

:sarcasm:

[dflprincess]

77. I was responding to the poster who complained about paying

"the extra health care costs for tobacco addicts" by pointing out that there is evidence that smokers may not cost more.

I didn't say people shouldn't quit smoking - I quit 18 months ago.

[Lorien]

76. Agreed. It's insane for anyone to continue smoking, knowing what we

know now:

Smoking 101 Fact Sheet

August 2008

Cigarette smoking has been identified as the most important source of preventable morbidity (disease and illness) and premature mortality (death) worldwide. Smoking-related diseases claim an estimated 438,000 American lives each year, including those affected indirectly, such as babies born prematurely due to prenatal maternal smoking and victims of "secondhand" exposure to tobacco's carcinogens. Smoking cost the United States over $193 billion in 2004, including $97 billion in lost productivity and $96 billion in direct health care expenditures, or an average of $4,260 per adult smoker.1

* Cigarette smoke contains over 4,800 chemicals, 69 of which are known to cause cancer. Smoking is directly responsible for approximately 90 percent of lung cancer deaths and approximately 80-90 percent of COPD (emphysema and chronic bronchitis) deaths.2
* About 8.6 million people in the U.S. have at least one serious illness caused by smoking. That means that for every person who dies of a smoking-related disease, there are 20 more people who suffer from at least one serious illness associated with smoking.3
* Among current smokers, chronic lung disease accounts for 73 percent of smoking-related conditions. Even among smokers who have quit chronic lung disease accounts for 50 percent of smoking-related conditions.4
* The list of diseases caused by smoking includes chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, including chronic bronchitis and emphysema), coronary heart disease, stroke, abdominal aortic aneurysm, acute myeloid leukemia, cataract, pneumonia, periodontitis, and bladder, esophageal, laryngeal, lung, oral, throat, cervical, kidney, stomach, and pancreatic cancers. Smoking is also a major factor in a variety of other conditions and disorders, including slowed healing of wounds, infertility, and peptic ulcer disease.5
* Smoking in pregnancy accounts for an estimated 20 to 30 percent of low-birth weight babies, up to 14 percent of preterm deliveries, and some 10 percent of all infant deaths. Even apparently healthy, full-term babies of smokers have been found to be born with narrowed airways and reduced lung function.6
* In 2005, 10.7 percent of all women smoked during pregnancy, down almost 45 percent from 1990.7
* Neonatal health-care costs attributable to maternal smoking in the U.S. have been estimated at $366 million per year, or $704 per maternal smoker.8
* Smoking by parents is also associated with a wide range of adverse effects in their children, including exacerbation of asthma, increased frequency of colds and ear infections, and sudden infant death syndrome. Secondhand smoke causes more than an estimated 202,000 asthma episodes, 790,000 physician visits for buildup of fluid in the middle ear (otitis media, or middle ear infection), and 430 sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) cases each year.9
* In 2006, an estimated 45.3 million, or 20.6% of adults (aged 18+) were current smokers. The annual prevalence of smoking declined 40 percent between 1965 and 1990, but has been virtually unchanged since then.10
* Males tend to have significantly higher rates of smoking prevalence than females. In 2006, 23.6 percent of males currently smoked compared to 17.8 percent of females.11
* Prevalence of current smoking in 2006 was highest among American Indians/Alaska Natives (32.2%), intermediate among non-Hispanic whites (21.8%) and non-Hispanic blacks (22.6%), and lowest among Hispanics (15.1%) and Asians (10.3%).12
* As smoking declines among the non-Hispanic white population, tobacco companies have targeted both non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics with intensive merchandising, which includes billboards, advertising in media targeted to those communities, and sponsorship of civic groups and athletic, cultural, and entertainment events. In 2005, advertising and promotion by the five major tobacco companies totaled $13.1 billion.13
* Tobacco advertising also plays an important role in encouraging young people to begin a lifelong addiction to smoking before they are old enough to fully understand its long-term health risk.14 Ninety percent of adults who smoke started by the age of 21, and half of them became regular smokers by their 18th birthday.15
* In 2007, 20 percent of high school students were current smokers.16 Over 6 percent of middle school students were current smokers in 2006.17
* Secondhand smoke involuntarily inhaled by nonsmokers from other people's cigarettes is classified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as a known human (Group A) carcinogen, responsible for approximately 3,400 lung cancer deaths and 46,000 (ranging 22,700-69,600) heart disease deaths in adult nonsmokers annually in the United States.18
* Workplaces nationwide are going smoke-free to provide clean indoor air and protect employees from the life-threatening effects of secondhand smoke. Nearly 70 percent of the U.S. workforce worked under a smoke free policy in 1999, but the percentage of workers protected varies by state, ranging from a high of 83.9 percent in Utah and 81.2 percent in Maryland to 48.7 percent in Nevada.19
* Employers have a legal right to restrict smoking in the workplace, or implement a totally smoke-free workplace policy. Exceptions may arise in the case of collective bargaining agreements with unions.
* Nicotine is an addictive drug, which when inhaled in cigarette smoke reaches the brain faster than drugs that enter the body intravenously. Smokers not only become physically addicted to nicotine; they also link smoking with many social activities, making smoking a difficult habit to break.20
* In 2006, an estimated 45.7 million adults were former smokers. Of the 45.3 million current adult smokers, 44 percent stopped smoking at least 1 day in the preceding year because they were trying to quit smoking completely.21
* Quitting smoking often requires multiple attempts. Using counseling or medication alone increases the chance of a quit attempt being successful; the combination of both is even more effective.22
* Nicotine replacement products can help relieve withdrawal symptoms people experience when they quit smoking.23
* There are seven medications approved by the FDA to aid in quitting smoking. Nicotine patches, nicotine gum and nicotine lozenges are available over-the-counter, and a nicotine nasal spray and inhaler are currently available by prescription. Buproprion SR (Zyban) and varenicline tartrate (Chantix) are non-nicotine pills.24
* Individual, group and telephone counseling are effective. Telephone quitline counseling is widely available and is effective for many different groups of smokers.25
* Nicotine replacement therapies are helpful in quitting when combined with a support program such as the American Lung Association's Freedom From Smoking (FFS), which addresses psychological and behavioral addictions to smoking and strategies for coping with urges to smoke.

For more information on smoking, please review the Trends in Tobacco Use report and Lung Disease Data in the Data and Statistics section of our website at www.lungusa.org, or call the American Lung Association at 1-800-LUNG-USA (1-800-586-4872).

Sources:

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Annual Smoking-Attributable Mortality, Years of Potential Life Lost, and Productivity Losses United States, 1997-2001. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report . July 2005. Vol. 54;25:625-628 .
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Tobacco Information and Prevention Source (TIPS). Tobacco Use in the United States. January 27, 2004.
3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Cigarette Smoking Attributable Morbidity - U.S., 2000. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2003 Sept; 52(35): 842-844.
4. Ibid.
5. U.S Department of Health and Human Services. Health Consequences of Smoking: A Report of the Surgeon General, 2004.
6. U.S Department of Health and Human Services. Women and Smoking: A Report of the Surgeon General, 2001.
7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Health Statistics. National Vital Statistics Reports. Births: Final Data for 2005. December 5, 2007; (56)5.
8. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. State Estimates of Neonatal Health-Care Costs Associated with Maternal Smoking U.S., 1996. Vol. 53, No. 39, October 8, 2004.
9. California Environmental Protection Agency. Proposed Identification of Environmental Tobacco Smoke as a Toxic Air Contaminant. June 2005.
10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Health Statistics. National Health Interview Survey, 2006. Analysis by the American Lung Association, Research and Program Services Division using SPSS and SUDAAN software.
11. Ibid.
12. Ibid.
13. U.S. Federal Trade Commission. Cigarette Report for 2004 and 2005. April 2007. Accessed on February 8, 2008.
14. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Preventing Tobacco Use among Young People: A Report of the Surgeon General, 1994.
15. Mowery PD, Brick PD, Farrelly MC. Legacy First Look Report 3. Pathways to Established Smoking: Results from the 1999 National Youth Tobacco Survey. Washington DC: American Legacy Foundation. October 2000.
16. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance � United States, 2007. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. June 6, 2008; 57(SS-04).
17. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Office on Smoking and Health. National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS). 2006 NYTS Data and Documentation. April 18, 2008. Accessed on April 30, 2008.
18. California Environmental Protection Agency. Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke. June 2005. Accessed on 4/30/07.
19. Shopland DR, Gerlach KK, Burns DM, Hartman AM, Gibson JT. State-Specific Trends in Smokefree Workplace Policy Coverage: the Current Population Tobacco Use Supplement, 1993 to 1999. J Occup Environ Med 2001; 43:680-686.
20. National Institute of Drug Abuse. Research Report on Nicotine: Addiction, August 2001.
21. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Health Statistics. National Health Interview Survey, 2006. Analysis by the American Lung Association, Research and Program Services Division using SPSS and SUDAAN software.
22. Fiore MC, Jaen CR, Baker TB, et al. Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence: 2008 Update. Clinical Practice Guideline. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service. May 2008.
23. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Smoking and Tobacco Use. You Can Quit Smoking. Accessed on October 2, 2007.
24. Fiore MC, Jaen CR, Baker TB, et al. Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence: 2008 Update. Clinical Practice Guideline. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service. May 2008.
25. Ibid.

*Racial and ethnic minority terminology reflects those terms used by the Centers For Disease Control.

http://www.lungusa.org/site/c.dvLUK9O0E/b.39853/k.5D05/Smoking_101_Fact_Sheet.htm

[Corey_Baker08]

34. $5.80 here in Ohio/Indiana

[truthisfreedom]

36. So smoke half as much.

You'll feel better and live longer.

[Marrah_G]

48. Doesnt really work that way.

You can't just smoke half. Maybe a few people could stick to that, but they are rare.

[joshcryer]

110. A pack always lasted me 4 days or so.

But still the prices are too much so fuck that.

[Serenitynow]

37. In New York City is $11

$7 in the black market.

[DCKit]

38. $7.80/pack (up from $5.25) in DC and $40/carton (up from $27) in VA.

It's generally a "pack-a-day" habit, because that's how it's dosed.

For those of you who are, or were, casual smokers or never smoked, it's all or nothing for those of us who are addicted to nicotine.

[Marrah_G]

47. I quit because of the cost.

When generics went past 5 bucks a pack and my hours at work were cut all at the same time I knew I had to quit somehow.

[DS1]

51. She's already more likely to have a stroke

[NashVegas]

53. I Wonder Who Will Be the Next Social Outcast For a Sin Tax Levy?

It's too easy to blame much of the obesity epidemic on commerce. I don't have a hard time imagining the class action lawsuits against Dolly Madison and their advertising agencies, and the TV stations that run them.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

57. Some stores around here (NJ) are jumping prices by like $1.50/pack

and the tax hasn't even hit yet.

[Neoma]

61. I hope it doesn't turn out to be like the Whiskey Rebellion.

[enlightenment]

62. Naw - more likely to echo Prohibition.

The modern day Mollie Hatchet's are having a field day and, like her merry band of sanctimonious thugs, will eventually convince the feds to pass a complete ban (the UK is headed that direction already - "What?" says the NHS, "the ban on smoking in public places isn't convincing enough people to quit? Well, we just need to ban it in private places, too!").

Then we'll have smugglers and 'tobacco runners' and 'smoke-easies'. The ATF can make raids and make sure they're filmed while they torch hundreds of pounds of tobacco . . .

It'll be a hoot. And work just about as well as Prohibition.

I'm an ex-smoker (quit before it was fashionable) and count myself lucky that I didn't morph into a born-again anti-smoking fanatic. I find the whole thing ridiculous. If there is one thing that history has shown you cannot successfully do, it's legislate morality.

[Neoma]

70. I think that'd suck even more.

[enlightenment]

72. Me too. nt

[MrSlayer]

63. You can get them cheap online. $15 for a carton of Marlboro.

And they don't report you to the state.

http://www.cigoutlet.net/

[RebelOne]

88. I tried purchasing online, but for some reason,

it would not take my debit card information. It kept requesting me to fill in card number and expiration date. I know everything is valid.

[pleah]

71. Will smokers band together and file a discrimination lawsuit?

:shrug: I mean, it is discrimination to target one group of people like this, isn't it?

Are they on their way to a fat tax next? Or maybe some other group of people they don't like.

[Ferret Annica]

78. Quit smoking, no one has my pity for a poisonous addiction

I have never smoked and am in better health then younger siblings of mine that do. Besides, it is an obscenity to waste farmland growing that crap.

[Sivafae]

80. Just you because you don't have pity doesn't mean the mean the tax is right.

Many people didn't have pity for the slaves either.

[Paladin]

82. Take Your Comparison Between Nicotine Addiction And Slavery And Shove It

This is just the sort of bullshit martyrdom ploy that smokers are not entitled to. Either get some courage and kick the habit, or feel free to smoke yourselves into an early grave---either way, don't dare to compare your burden to the ownership and oppression of human beings......

[mr_smith007]

84. One thing to remember

about smoking is the psychology of smoking. I have smoked on and off for years and there is a pretty solid reason why so many in the lower income classes and those that have faced really tough life circumstances smoke. Their daily lives may be so mentally, physically or financially onerous that they cannot take a longview and care about emphysema, cancer, etc.

If life has thrown you curveballs and you have the coping skills to handle them, that is great and I am envious of you. But for others who have suffered a lifetime of hypomania, generalize anxiety, panic disorders, major depressive disorder, schizophrenia, trapped in poverty, severe personal loss, crushed dreams from mental challenges or unlucky life circumstannces and couldn't afford a therapist or were not raised by parents with the right parenting skills, they know the dangers of smoking and simply can't find the ability to care.

This isn't a copout, this is just reality. Keep these things in mind when you chastise people for not having the courage to quit. Many of those daily curse the world for being alive and having to endure mental pain and ugly life circumstances, why in the hell would they care about the chronic effects of smoking 20 months or 20 years down the road when they are just trying to survive the week.

[Paladin]

87. I'm Fully Aware Of The Grim Effects Of Cigarette Smoking

Both my parents were life-long smokers who kicked the habit late in life, and they went though absolute hell getting clean. I would never claim that giving up cigarettes is easy, but lots of folks do it; neither of my folks was heroic or possessed of super-human powers, but they did it. I just don't think cigarette smoking is a sympathetic habit, no matter what personal, social, financial, mental, physical or familial factors are involved. Sympathy for individuals stricken with any one of the afflictions you're set forth? Absolutely. Sympathy for their making things worse by buying and using cigarettes? Sorry, I don't buy into that.......

[shanti]

95. thank you!

:thumbsup:

[anigbrowl]

102. Fail. I msoke, I'm addicted, it's my own own fault. Slaves, pfft.

Upping the tax is a good thing. I support it 100%.

[Vinnie From Indy]

81. Do you feel that way about all substance addiction?

Are you typing this as you wolf down a triple bacon cheeseburger that you picked up on your motorcycle without wearing a helmet?

Please list your habits and let others give their editorials about your behavior.

Maybe you should reflect a moment on the fact that the vast majority of people that become addicted to nicotine were TARGETED and hooked by tobacco companies while in their teens.

HAving "no pity" for your fellow Americans that are suffering and struggling with nicotine addiction says what about you?

The fact is that all you self-righteous folks that cheer raising taxes on ADDICTS are the real obscenity. Why no outrage about not using tobacco settlement money to assist folks with REAL programs to quit nicotine?

The dirty little secret that seems to be OK with the vast majority of Americans is that the government and the tobacco companies could CARE LESS about assisting folks quit nicotine. They want these addicts to keep smoking and keep paying.

[LanternWaste]

83. Well, tomorrow's my Quit Date, so...

"Cigarette smokers in the US is an endangered species."
We can certainly hope so...


Well, tomorrow's my Quit Date, so it looks like I'll be saving around $1500 annually. Seems like a good thing to me.

I'd consider rolling my own, but since that stuff tastes even worse than it smells (and smells pretty awful), it seems as though finally giving my lungs a break is in order.

Ah well, it's a filthy, nasty, unhealthy addiction; annoying to the people around me; expensive as hell...it's time for me to break the cycle.

[daleo]

91. Good luck with that

After a while you will wonder why you ever smoked.

Here's a tip that helped me. Go to the library and get out some books about smoking, focussing on the negative health effects and how the corrupt tobacco industry lures youngsters. It strengthens the resolve.

[JeanGrey]

90. I can't believe people will pay 44 bucks for cigarettes.

Blows my mind.

[shanti]

94. GOOD

i'm not mincing words here. my father is dying from emphysema and has lost half of one lung due to smoking. an uncle now uses a voice box because of esophageal cancer due to.....smoking. my grandmother died as the result of lung cancer due to the stinking cancer sticks.

excluding myself, just about everyone in my family has smoked at one time or another. there's nothing good to come from nicotine, and if this forces some to quit smoking cigarettes, i'm all for it!!!

[CRF450]

105. Amen.

I watched my mother die from congestive heart failure, but heavy smoking was also an attribute to her death cause of smoking for most of her 60 years of life as her lungs were F'd up real bad too. My dad used to smoke in his early days for 15 years then one day he quit, just out of the blue. Today at 72 years old he's still in really good shape for his age! Nothing keeps him from moving around or doing some outside project, like building an observatory building for his telescope right now even though his knees hurt. Me, my older brother and sister have never picked up the habit nor any drug use!

I look at a smoker who'd cough then puff on a cigg, and hardly do anything but breath through his/her mouth like the person ran 50 yards and think "whats the point in that crap?? Is it stress? Is it pear pressure in teenage years?? What is it that lures someone who more than not, starts out healthy, and then gradually kill themselves because of an addiction?". Its the same deal for alcohol for me, I'd drink some to get a buzz, but I don't wanna get all F'd and hammered like everybody does especially the young people at my age of 22.

[joshcryer]

111. 100 years ago none of them would have lived past 40.

So please don't be so upset!

[Paladin]

116. And People Are Calling ME An Asshole On This Thread....

Were you trying to be funny or something? Somehow I doubt it. What an irredeemably shitty comment to make.....

[and-justice-for-all]

106. Cigarette smoke is disgusting..I hate the smell of it...

I stopped going out to clubs because the smell is so appalling.

[glinda]

115. They are 54 a carton here.

[ohio2007]

117. If you can afford to smoke, you can afford the tax.

If you can't afford to smoke, give it up. Think of all the disposable income that can be spent of fast food .

lol

[Staneck]

120. Here in NY, the black market on cigarettes is thriving

I know a guy that buys cartons of cigarettes from certain cigarette posts and sells them at $7 instead of $11. This is sad because we need the revenue to fund initiatives such as SchIPP that are based on cigarette taxes.

[Zavulon]

121. This is just stupid.

In NYC cigarettes are $10 a pack or so - which is practically begging for a black market. My state of residence is Maryland, where people drive to Virginia to buy their cigarettes.

Eventually, smokers will get priced out of the vice and everyone will get a new tax to pick up the tab.

[apnu]

122. I quit smoking years ago, but still check the price of cigs in my area...

... In the Chicago Loop the average price, I've seen, has long been about $7.00 per pack.

I'm betting, much like the price gouging by Big Oil, people will shrug and pay more. Addiction is a bitch.

[The Traveler]

124. I love these threads

The self-righteous identify themselves quite easily.

The Buddha observed that to live is to suffer. The correct way to deal with that, according to that tradition, is to seek enlightenment. That probably is the best way to proceed.

For most, life is a struggle waged against ever increasing levels of pain. So, why give people so much crap about taking some pleasure in life? If you live long enough, some agonizing, degenerative disease will take you out of this world not long after the doctors and drug companies have sucked your bank accounts dry. It might as well be lung cancer, in my viewpoint. In fact, I would prefer it to Alzheimer's.Just me. Ironically,

I know lots of self-righteous anti-smokers who are, frankly, obese. They seek comfort in food. I prefer a smoke with a cup of coffee ... or maybe a shot of Irish whiskey. Both approaches are inferior to the quest for enlightenment and are certain to lead to an earlier grave. The difference is the self righteous prefer to tax my vice, though according to recent studies McDonald's is at least a lethal as Marlboro.

It is easy to quit smoking. I have done it hundreds of times (sorry, Mr. Clemens). Staying quit does seem to be the greater challenge. Actually, staying out of jail without nicotine might be the greater challenge. I will never claim to be a poster child for mental health. I've long ago figured out that I smoke for your comfort and safety. And I know I am not the only brave soul around these parts who risks cancer for your well being and the greater good of our communities.

But do the self righteous gonks around here express any appreciation for our sacrifice? Of course not. They are, after all, the morally superior. This has been made abundantly clear, many, many times. It reminds me, frankly, of the puritanical monologues I encountered as a boy in various churches of the South. I didn't care for it much them. I find it kinda funny now, when some 150 lbs overweight goober lectures me about my health choices.

I really don't give a crap about the opinions of the new Puritans. But it is kinda nice to know who they are ...

In truth, I am once again trying to live tobacco free. So far, only small appliances and a recalcitrant Windows box have suffered the consequences. I might make it this time. Then again, I might again suffer ignominious failure. I can do all manner of difficult things, but quiting the filthy weed thus far has not been one of them. Alas. At least I will go to my grave knowing that I will have missed the last 5-10 WORST years or so of my best case life span, and I will have a hell of a lot more fun and friendship than most of ya. Have fun with the degenerative brain diseases that await the clean living! :evilgrin:

Trav

** edited because while Trav may sometime quit smoking, he apparently will NEVER spell check BEFORE posting! **

[LanternWaste]

125. Six of one, half a dozen of the other...

Self righteous anti-smokers vs. pro-smoking defending the indefensible. Lungers vs. Ash for Brains.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other-- they're both annoying, both self-righteous, and both remind me of Sunday morning televangelists.

[sarcasmo]

126. 5.25 for a pack of Marlboro here in Michigan, we are one of the highest Taxed States.

I don't smoke, but couldn't imagine paying that money.

[AnOhioan]

127. To the self-righteous, sanctimonious blowhards on this thread

Take your superiority complex and shove it where the sun don't shine

[bitchkitty]

128. A pack of Tops tobacco went from $1.99 (last week) to $3.29 (today).

I stopped buying packs of filtered cigarettes a long time ago, I smoke less with roll my owns because I don't smoke them in public. If they keep taxing this shit maybe I'll finally quit. Or start a hydro-tobacco garden! :)

[Xenotime]

131. Sounds like a good reason to quit. Too bad that means less money for the children.

[gollyohgolly]

132. Totally wrong

The tobacco tax is an extremely regressive one. The vast majority of smokers are middle class or poorer. The taxers used the excuse that it was for the children, but it is just another regressive tax making po folks pay for some big government program. Cigs went up $1.50 a pack, and they just swatted us with a big beer tax too. Wham, bam, thanks poor man, now we can fund our whims with your blood.

Here is a capitol idea.. Instead of paying for someone else's kid's health insurance, how about stashing some of that money to pay for the smoker's inevitable visit to our health care system? Start saving now for the bill that we know is coming.

As far as making people quit, taxes might get a few, but most people are far more addicted than stopping for $1.50 a pack. The smokers around me are rebelling. They are rolling their own (Still got nailed, RYO tobacco went up to $24/lb, just taxes), planning gardens, looking into bulk buying co-ops, and discussing who the bootleggers will turn out to be. Now that it is over $60 a carton, it is worth running cigs just like dope.

Obviously I have a problem with this. The tax burden should be spread around. Smokers should not be singled out to pay a disproportionate tax burden, and especially a hugely regressive one. It is a little like the crack vs powder disparity, or just targeting AIG bonuses for extra taxes. That is not acceptable to be able to single people out for big regressive taxes.

The extreme taxation is a wimp's prohibition. They don't have the sack to outlaw the stuff, yet they take a path that makes a black market, fails to modify behavior, and as with the last attempts at drug and alcohol prohibition, it will end in huge failure and a huge amount of blood and suffering donated predominately by the poor and middle class.

The answer is not targeted and regressive taxes, it is behavior modification. Through education and social pressures, make smoking undesirable. It is already headed that way, capitolize on the momentum. That and find a way for people to quit easier. As one poster pointed out, cocaine is easier to quit, and about 5% make it a month or two out of coke rehab. A lot of smokers really do want to quit.