I've got a recent post up with 200 replies....

[catnhatnh]

But my question was whether a 2,000% tax increase (which has happened) was a fair result and especially if the target was the lowest economic demographic.

It was about smoking and has flamed. Is any increase that large justified while the national discussion is on how to free up cash and cut taxes?

In fairness it regards buying loose tobacco and rolling your own cigarettes.

Again I ask for responses on tax policy, not social policy.

[dysfunctional press]

1. tax policy IS social policy.

time for smokers to give up their filthy habit.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

3. At least in this case it is what with public health issues and all.

[Greyhound]

5. Then how will you fund the programs and giveaways that depend on the taxes smoking generates? n/t

[dysfunctional press]

6. with the health care savings it would generate.

next question?

[catnhatnh]

12. Except it doesn't....

Studies show smokers cost less lifelong...

[dysfunctional press]

14. got a link?

i've heard otherwise.

[Vincardog]

19. I Have heard arguments like that, "Because smokers die younger they don't cost as much"

I believe that argument overlooks the cost of Asama COPD and other costs of smoking and is BS.

[dysfunctional press]

20. exactly. they may live shorter lives- but their illnesses can be VERY pricey.

nt

[Vincardog]

25. Did ya ever get that LINK?

[dysfunctional press]

27. never expected to...

unless it was to a tobacco company FAQ website.

[Greyhound]

36. About 40 times in the last three months alone, this is just an ass with too much time on his hands.

[hughee99]

29. The New England Journal of Medicine

investigated this in 1997 and incorporated the results of many different studies. From reading this, it sounds like it depends on what costs you include or exclude in your measurements when considering which costs more.

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/337/15/1052

[dysfunctional press]

30. they say that 'over time' it wuld lead to higher health care costs...

but it would also lead to a more productive society, so those health care costs would be more than compensated for.

[catnhatnh]

33. Sorry It took a while, I was away.

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/337/15/1052

unless you figure this is RJR propaganda...

[dysfunctional press]

34. already been posted and commented on...

long term, healthcare costs would go up- but that would be because of an increased population living longer, which would also mean a healthier and more productive society/workforce, so the increased economic output would more than cover the additional healthcare costs.

[The Straight Story]

21. So those savings go directly to schip? How are they collected? (nt)

[dysfunctional press]

26. the savings are systemwide.

more healthcare available for more people.

[Greyhound]

35. New name, same schmuck.

[liberal N proud]

2. There are some here who support similar taxes on gas

All in an effort to curb gasoline use.

[Greyhound]

4. Smokers don't count. It would already be outlawed if it weren't for the revenues it brings

to business and the government. The prohibitionists will once again have their way, fuck things up worse as they always do, and come up with a whole bunch of draconian laws to impose their will on others.

[jmg257]

7. Think it would depend on the final price-was the original price before the tax too cheap?

Of course some tried to justify a higher gas tax when the gas was so low, and I was against that, but I like cheap gas - it helped budgeting a lot. And though I don't like it, I don't mind spending a bit more for a cigar, as long as the money is going to a good cause.

[catnhatnh]

11. I don't know.....

define how a tax on a minority, and most of those of lower income class, on a legal product is ever "too cheap". It's a "sin tax". How do you sin and how much should you pay for the benefit of all non-sinners? Because I love were the money is going, I just don't feel I owe that much of it.

[jmg257]

13. Unfortunately "sin taxes" get passed because they do target a minority, and not enough people

complain. Also unfortunate is that higher taxes are what happen when we "need" the govt to do more and more for us.

I read your other thread - could you explain again why this tax targets lower income people? Was it related to "roll your own" because of the already outrages prices? (honest question - need clarification)

edit: never mind I re-read the other thread and got it!

[dysfunctional press]

18. "I just don't feel I owe that much of it."

then quit. you won't have to pay any of it.

[catnhatnh]

8. A series of replies like this make me wish I were merely...

...a gay black female (and no disrespect here, I just haven't seen a huge tax increase on that).

Regardless of your thoughts on smoking, how is this tax increase fair?

[dysfunctional press]

10. because it's a completely voluntary tax.

absolutely NOBODY is "forced" to pay it.

[rucky]

9. Use it to offer free Chantix to anybody who wants it, then we can talk.

[Mari333]

15. believe me if you start a thread about smoking

people will be all over you like flies on shit.
cept for me. :)

[DRoseDARs]

16. "especially if the target was the lowest economic demographic" is a "this, therefore that" argument.

Coloration is not causation: Just because the majority of smokers are of the poorer economic tiers does NOT mean they are being targeted. It's a false and disingenuous argument to make.

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Correlation-implies-causation-(logical-fallacy)

Encyclopedia > Correlation implies causation (logical fallacy)

Correlation implies causation, also known as cum hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin for "with this, therefore because of this") and false cause, is a logical fallacy by which two events that occur together are claimed to be cause and effect. In philosophy, the term logical fallacy properly refers to a formal fallacy: a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument which renders the argument invalid. ...


For example:

Teenage girls eat lots of chocolate.
Teenage girls are most likely to have acne.
Therefore, chocolate causes acne.



Or applied to your argument:
Poorer people use more tobacco than wealthier people.
SCHIP is being partly funded by a nearly 2000% tax increase on tobacco products.
Therefore, poor people are being targeted.

If you want people to take you seriously, stop using false arguments.

[jmg257]

22. Cat was saying it targeted the poor due to an increase on loose tobacco tax

of 2000%+, which she said effects mostly the "Roll Your Own" poorer people already trying to save on the $$$ cigarette cost.

[hughee99]

23. Are you sure this is a false argument?

While the use of "targeted" may not be right, because it implies intent...

Poor people will be harder hit than wealthier people because poor people have less "disposable" income than rich people. If poor people buy more tobacco, a majority of the revenue will be raised from poor people.

While poor people may not be "targeted", by that I mean they are not intending to hurt poor people more than rich people, that will be the result.

Of course, anything that is used by all segments of society will hurt the poor more than the wealthy if the price increases because there are more poor people than rich people (assuming usage figures are relatively the same), and poor people are less able to handle price increases.

[WI_DEM]

17. I think it is fair because it's financing health care by promoting a tax which might cause people to

quit a very unhealthy habit--smoking. I speak from experience. I was a smoker and my habit got too expensive and I quit. It wasn't easy. But it saved me a lot of money in the long run and I feel a lot healthier today.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

24. If you want to see where this is going, read this.

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/1984/09/17/1984_09_17_045_TNY_CARDS_000337240

[S n o w b a l l]

28. It would make more sense to tax Happy Meals

With all the mini vans & SUVs with 4-5 kids lined up after school in the drive through, they'd make a killing and those who'd benefit would be the ones paying. And the added value of healthier kids would be a plus and would ease health care costs for all of us.

Makes more sense to me.

[nc4bo]

31. Too many people would bitch, moan and whine. The horror of food police. nt

[marketcrazy1]

32. !!!!

forget it!!