Fox Guest Smokes On-Air, Says Taxing Tobacco To Fund Children’s Health Is Like Racial Discrimination
Fox Guest Smokes On-Air, Says Taxing Tobacco To Fund Children’s Health Is Like Racial Discrimination
This Saturday, Fox News’s Cashin’ In did a segment asking whether a bipartisan Senate plan to raise taxes on tobacco products to fund an expansion of the successful Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is “moral.”
Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig called the proposal “discrimination,” analogizing it to “all blacks” or “all Christians” having “to pay a surcharge for kids health care.” He also argued that smoking “harms nobody but the smoker,” proceeding to light up a cigarette on-air to prove his point. Watch it:
The majority of Americans support taxing cigarettes to finance children’s health care. The Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids reports that “67 percent favor” a 75-cent per pack federal cigarette tax increase ” while only 28 percent oppose it.” Additionally, as Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) has pointed out, tobacco taxes were used to fund the program when it began a decade ago.
Tobacco taxes have the added benefit of discouraging smoking, which does, despite Hoenig’s rhetoric, harm more than just the smoker. According to the American Association for Respiratory Care, with every 10 percent rise in the cigarette tax, “youth smoking drops by seven percent…and overall cigarette consumption declines by about four percent.”
SCHIP currently insures close to 6 million children and is considered “to be the main explanation” for why “the number of uninsured children has dropped from about 10 million to about 7 million from 1997 to 2006. The current proposal would expand “current levels of spending by $35 billion over the next five years” and “reduce the number of uninsured children by 4.1 million.” Unfortunately, President Bush has promised to veto the Senate legislation, which is being opposed heavily by the tobacco industry.
(HT: News Hounds)
Transcript:
KEENAN: A new push in the Senate to raise taxes on tobacco to pay for health care programs for kids. Well is that a moral thing to do? Let’s get the stock smarts. Our cash it in crew this week, we have the boys on remote: Wayne Rogers, Jonathan Hoenig and Jonas Max Ferris. And joining me here in the studio, Meredith Whitney and Lee Gallagher. Dagen will be back next week. Welcome everybody. Okay Jonathan, are you willing to pay more for a pack of cigarettes so a six year old can have health care? Please say yes.
HOENIG: I, I, am not Terry. In fact, you know, smoking is a legal activity, in fact
KEENAN: Jonathan!
HOENIG: A lot of people actually find it to be a very pleasurable activity and it harms nobody but the smoker, and what’s immoral is to make anybody pay for kids healthcare except for their parents. This is just another example of the nanny state run horribly amuck.
KEENAN: Wayne?
HOENIG: Lucky Strike means good tobacco.
FERRIS: Jonathan, smokers hurt other people. You say it like it’s just themselves, they have the right to smoke. They don’t have the right to raise my health insurance bill because that’s what they’re doing right now. When you go work for a company, that company doesn’t pay a higher health insurance bill because you smoke, that cost is burdened by the nonsmokers. It’s pure communism — you should hate it.
KEENAN: And you know Jonathan, what about second-hand smoke, for all those people in the studio out there? Are you allowed to smoke inside the building?
HOENIG: I think our camera man’s actually smoking too. Terry, the fact is is that smokers have a right to smoke, and if you’re in a bar and somebody is smoking and you don’t like it, leave.
KEENAN: You don’t have a right in New York City. You can’t smoke in a bar here.
HOENIG: People don’t have the right to have frois grais anymore. That doesn’t mean that that’s a moral right either . This would be the same Terry if you said, well, all blacks have to pay a surcharge to pay for kids health care or all Christians. This is discrimination on its face.
KEENAN: Well, Meredith, most people would agree with Jonathan say that you have a choice to smoke or not to smoke.
WHITNEY: I think that everyone would disagree with Jonathan on his last comments.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Someone explain to me how the hell this is considered PRO-life?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:33 pmHoenig sets records as the dumbest talk show guest ever.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:33 pmIn most places, it’s against the law to light up in a closed environment.
They should have handcuffed his ass and forgot to push his head down as they tossed him in the back of the patrol car.
This is what Bush threatens to veto.
The Dems should just keep sending it back, messaging to the MSM, Bush doesn’t care about America’s children.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:33 pmThese rethugs are insane
July 16th, 2007 at 3:33 pmIt’s worse than racial discrimination!
July 16th, 2007 at 3:34 pmNeed a fire crew to put this one out?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:34 pmOnly on Fox!!! Hahahahaha!
Later that day, Fox News received a check for $5,000,000 from Altria.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:34 pmIn Virginia, the taxes on Ciggs are nice and low. CT_V1 ain’t a ciggy user, though.
-THUNDERSTORM ALERT, CT_V1 hiatus to commence.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:35 pmAs a lung cancer survivor, I can only think that Hoenig better be getting paid a shitload of money from the tobacco companies to put his life at risk.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:36 pmOr he’s a moron.
Or both.
Taxes from tobacco should go to tobacco related illnesses only.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:36 pmAll TPers. Pray to your local weather god for continued thunder and lightning storms in VA.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:37 pmWas he in the New York headquarters when he lit up? That’s a $1,000 fine right there!
July 16th, 2007 at 3:37 pmA vice tax is nothing new. And people choose to smoke so how is that like racial discrimination.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:37 pm-THUNDERSTORM ALERT, CT_V1 hiatus to commence.
Comment by CT_V1 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:35 pm
———————————————————————–
Don’t worry, CT_V1, The Troll ™ NoVA is in the clear!
July 16th, 2007 at 3:39 pmOK, so when do we start taxing companies like McDonald’s and Coca-Cola for ruining our health, too?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:39 pmFox News viewers are second-to-last in their level of knowledge on the issues. FOX NEWS = NEWS FOR KNUCKLEHEADS.
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=319
July 16th, 2007 at 3:40 pmWhen is Al the Goracle gonna pay you Lefties for ruining your fragile little minds?!?!
July 16th, 2007 at 3:41 pmOK, so when do we start taxing companies like McDonald’s and Coca-Cola for ruining our health, too?
Comment by Orejas — July 16, 2007 @ 3:39 pm
Soft drink choice is decided at birth, like race and sexual orientation.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:41 pmA vice tax is nothing new. And people choose to smoke so how is that like racial discrimination.
People are going to grow their own tobacco rather than pay these ridiculous taxes.
The Democrats mostly aren’t stupid. They need smoking to raise revenue and to kill off people in their 60s to prevent them from claiming Medicare.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:42 pmMust be windy in that studio.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:43 pmbut why always tax the same vice? is gluttony not taxable?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:43 pmI can just see mommy12 growing its cash crop in the back window of its trailer…
July 16th, 2007 at 3:43 pmPeople are going to grow their own tobacco rather than pay these ridiculous taxes.
The Democrats mostly aren’t stupid. They need smoking to raise revenue and to kill off people in their 60s to prevent them from claiming Medicare.
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
Good – that’s still healthier than the chemicals Philip Morris puts in their cancer sticks. And if they far organically – even better!
July 16th, 2007 at 3:44 pmFOX NEWS = NEWS FOR KNUCKLEHEADS.
Comment by Republicans Can’t Govern. — July 16, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
I think of them more as knuckledraggers…
July 16th, 2007 at 3:45 pmComment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
I thought you guys were only into little boys & prostitutes, I’m surprised that smoking is one of your issues.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:45 pmI wonder if he’s lighting the filter of that Marlboro?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:46 pmI can just see mommy12 growing its cash crop in the back window of its trailer…
You mean like your hero the Goracle?
“all of my life,†I hoed it, chopped it, shredded it, “put it in the barn and stripped it and sold it.â€
July 16th, 2007 at 3:46 pmGood – that’s still healthier than the chemicals Philip Morris puts in their cancer sticks. And if they far organically – even better!
Well, ok, toasterhead, then who is going to pay for their Medicare and who is going to pay for SCHIP?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:46 pmFarmin’s hard work, mommydozen, something about which you are clueless.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:49 pmWell, ok, toasterhead, then who is going to pay for their Medicare and who is going to pay for SCHIP?
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:46 pm
We then cut farm subsidies to the major tobacco growers since individual smokers will be growing their own. With the savings we can fund SCHIP. As far as medicare, the smokers are on their own. They don’t need nationalized health care to take care of them.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:50 pmYou mean like your hero the Goracle?
“all of my life,†I hoed it, chopped it, shredded it, “put it in the barn and stripped it and sold it.â€
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 3:46 pm
————————————————————————
Or the Goracle III:
and he’s not talking about tobacco!!!
July 16th, 2007 at 3:51 pmHeres where they can get the money. instead of 15% Capital Gains Tax, jump up to 35% like the middle class has to pay.
Heres an article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/13/business/13tax.html?ex=1184904000&en=945f0ff3b6b757c2&ei=5018&partner=BRITANNICA
July 16th, 2007 at 3:52 pmsecond-hand smoke is a liberal conspiracy like global warming, right?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:52 pmHummmm More tax on us poor smokers. Pretty soon we won’t be able to smoke in our car, on a beach, or in our own yards.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:52 pmI smoke….and I would want this tax to make it through.
This Hoenig guy is an idiot. I don’t think it’s fair to automatically assume he’s a raging conservative just because he’s on Fox. Ok, I HOPE he’s not a conservative just because he’s on Fox.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:54 pmSmoking only harms the smoker?? Well, I guess that’s true. If someone lights up next to me and declines my polite request for him not to, and I punch him in the face… I guess he’s right.. it only harms the smoker.
Health?? If second-hand smoke is unhealthy, then where’s my money? I grew up on second-hand smoke and didn’t have any say in the matter. But even if there are no health risks, it’s ANNOYING!!! If you were standing next to me and every few seconds leaned over and said “Poit!” then I’d ask you to stop and if you didn’t I’d have you kicked out of whatever establishment we were in, and the law would be on my side. Why? because it’s called annoying, and harrassment if you keep doing it. It should be the same with cigs
We don’t need a tax on cigs any more. They are already illegal in a lot of public places. What we need is permission to take a rolled up newspaper to smokers who hang around and puff in our faces. Problem solved.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:55 pmSarge, this jackass purports to be an economics expert. You know, a Foxpurt.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:56 pmThe only thing he’s able to spurt is a weak stream on stupidity.
second-hand smoke is a liberal conspiracy like global warming, right?
July 16th, 2007 at 3:56 pmComment by Pete Bogs — July 16, 2007 @ 3:52 pm
————————————————————-
So I’ve heard!
He also argued that smoking “harms nobody but the smoker,†proceeding to light up a cigarette on-air to prove his point.
And no injuries were recorded! Good point.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:58 pmThe only thing he’s able to spurt is a weak stream on stupidity.
Comment by RUCerious
So it would seem.
My favorite part of the article:
President Bush has promised to veto the Senate legislation, which is being opposed heavily by the tobacco industry.
“heh heh, don’t worry big tobakky, i got your back, Ol’ George won’t let anything bad happen to you.”
July 16th, 2007 at 3:59 pmAin’t it grand? The state makes money off tobacco!!! All the more incentive to get more people hooked. What a great country!!!
July 16th, 2007 at 4:01 pmsecond-hand smoke is a liberal conspiracy like global warming, right?
Comment by Pete Bogs — July 16, 2007 @ 3:52 pm
yeah, no worries, brother. Don’t worry, you could tie a plastic bag FILLED with smoke around your head for like, 30 minutes and you’d be fine.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:01 pmThis Hoenig guy is a media whore. Stupid stunt to get attention for himself.
a few examples of innocent groups effected by smoking:
the states should be the ones suing cigarette co’s to reimburse taxpayers for medical dollars wasted.
people effected by second hand smoke in their work environment (like bartenders & waiters).
kids whose parents smoke in the house
anyone who carries health insurance and is a non-smoker.
sometimes there really isn’t a counterpoint voice necessary to be “fair and balanced.” smoking hurts people, it should happen less, and now that American Cigarette companies are losing business in America, they should not be allowed to get the rest of the world hooked on their product as well.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:01 pmWe then cut farm subsidies to the major tobacco growers since individual smokers will be growing their own. With the savings we can fund SCHIP. As far as medicare, the smokers are on their own. They don’t need nationalized health care to take care of them.
You’ll have to talk to the Democratic majority. Obama, Turbin, and Tom Harkin won’t tolerate removal of their pork, errrr, farm subsidies!
July 16th, 2007 at 4:02 pmWhat state was this addict in when he lit up? I bet there’s a law against it.
Smoke as much as you want. Keep the smoke away from me, don’t burden the health care system when your lungs give out, and feel free to die at your leisure. Hopefully you’ll croak before you can reproduce.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:05 pmIf you Progessives don’t think, which you prove here on a daily basis, you are going to be hood winked like the right. The majority of the people who smoke in this country are uneducated, low income, and don’t pay taxes. The tax on tobacco is a tax on the poor. If you raise that tax, you are essentially taxing the poor even more. Also, if the smokers all quit, who are you go tax? Why don’t smokers quit, and use that money to insure their children or themselves.
If you smoke one pack a day for one year, at four dollars a pack, thats 1424.00 you could spend on your childrens health care! But since the goverment gives evrything away, keep on smoking!!
July 16th, 2007 at 4:05 pmWhy shouldn’t we tax marijuana? For the convenience of EEL Gore’s kid?
July 16th, 2007 at 4:05 pmSmoking harms only the smoker? Wrong.
My former mother-in-law has no voicebox, and suffered horribly with esophageal cancer.
She never smoked.
Her husband smoked like a chimney, and only stopped when HE had a heart attack, not for her silly cancer.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:06 pmWhy shouldn’t we tax marijuana? For the convenience of EEL Gore’s kid?
Comment by CT_V1 — July 16, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
Marijuana is illegal you dolt.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:08 pmThere is a much more important post that TP buried with this one. Smoking is stupid and this dumb a$$ is stupid, now put this post below the more important filibuster post.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:09 pmThe majority of the people who smoke in this country are uneducated, low income, and don’t pay taxes. The tax on tobacco is a tax on the poor.
Comment by Johnny Swank — July 16, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
They can avoid the tax and in the process save money by quitting.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:12 pmComment by Zooey — July 16, 2007 @ 4:06 pm
That’s awful, Zoo. I smoke and have for 20 years. But I don’t EVER smoke in the house, the car, or anywhere around the kids. My sons Dr.s have constantly harassed me.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:13 pmComment by Nat — July 16, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
Uhhhh, I hope you didn’t expect to convey any new information there.
Keeping score: Your IQ is now -43. Thank you for your update.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:14 pmDon’t burden the health care system? The taxes collected from smokers is incredibly high. If the goverment lost this income, they would have to tax some other corporation. Smokers are actually paying for their own health care, and others as well.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:14 pmWhy don’t smokers quit, and use that money to insure their children or themselves.
Comment by Johnny Swank — July 16, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
Today, you get to learn a new word: Addiction.
More money is being spent to get and keep people addicted to smoking than any tax could hope to raise. Why not take the money directly from the corporations pushing smoking and use THAT for health care?
July 16th, 2007 at 4:14 pmBring back Joe Camal, and the kids can fund their own insurance.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:15 pmMore money is being spent to get and keep people addicted to smoking than any tax could hope to raise. Why not take the money directly from the corporations pushing smoking and use THAT for health care?
How do you plan to do that?
July 16th, 2007 at 4:16 pmClinton smoked fish flavored cigars in the White House!
July 16th, 2007 at 4:17 pmWhy not take the money directly from the corporations pushing smoking and use THAT for health care?
How do you plan to do that? — How about we get those Ocean’s 13 guys to do it for us. That make you happy? They could tunnel their way under Philip Morris and be out of there before dawn.
Comment by m12
July 16th, 2007 at 4:18 pmWhy do smoking Fox talking heads hate children?
July 16th, 2007 at 4:18 pmWell why don’t they legalize marijuana AND tax it?
July 16th, 2007 at 4:19 pmMore money is being spent to get and keep people addicted to smoking than any tax could hope to raise. Why not take the money directly from the corporations pushing smoking and use THAT for health care?
How do you plan to do that?
Comment by m12 — July 16, 2007 @ 4:16 pm
And you get to learn a new word too.. it’s called: Sarcasm.
My position is simple: You can have a tax on cigarettes to pay for healthcare problems related to second-hand smoke
OR
You can make it illegal to smoke in a public place.
You can’t do both. If it’s illegal to smoke in a public place, then you’re taxing people too dumb to pay for their own healthcare, in which case you’re probably not getting much money.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:19 pmOne thing Clinton did not do. He never maligned a fallen soldier.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:19 pmThis might be a good time to point out that–when under stress–wingers show poor impulse control.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:20 pmI’m a smoker. The cost of smokes, life insurance and possible health concerns are making me phase this part of my life out. I have no problems with the additional taxes, as long as they are spent as intended. However, I think it is time that we tax fast food. I don’t believe smokers should be keep taking the brunt of these types of taxes. Isn’t fast food (obesity) becoming more and more responsible for everyone’s health issues, including our children’s? If we are going to keep taxing as a deterent, shouldn’t we be honest? There are probably several bad habits that affect us all and the legal system can’t reasonably address which could be taxed. Maybe it is time we demand a change in our whole tax system. We the people definately need to elect a politician that will spend those taxes on our prioities not the priorities of the drug companies, oil industry, military industrial complex, etc. I believe in government and taxes. I just don’t trust the current system of deciding how to spend those taxes. Is it really our government? So, for me, cigarette taxes are a much larger issue of fairness.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:20 pmSpeaking of smoking, can someone tell me when a cigarette butt stopped becoming litter?
Just about everyone who smokes thinks it’s okay to just toss those on the ground when they’re done… why?
July 16th, 2007 at 4:20 pmI think that Jonathan Hoenig character is an idiot. But I also think that cig smokers have been taxed enough already, either make them illegal or find something new to tax. It’s easy to pick on smokers and to tax something that’s unpopular like tobacco, but if the current trend continues they’ll cost $15 a friggin’ pack eventually.
That’s why I propose a fat tax. If you’re fat, you’re hurting my eyes. It’s not just your fat, but your second hand fat that’s killing people!!! Fat people are also contributing to the health care crisis as well. How about a 75 cent tax on BigMacs, and a $1.50 per slice tax on cheesecake and a $2.00 tax on a pint Haggan-daus?
It’s all about compromise people!
July 16th, 2007 at 4:21 pmThat video is just gross. Just. Gross.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:21 pmIf somebody wants to smoke they should be able to as long as nobody else is affected. —- Which is outside, not in a confined restaurant. And does this mean that you would be for the Gov’t banning smoking by adults w/ children in their own homes? Their being affected too, right?
Where does it stop, a chocolate tax? A fast food tax? —– Pay a pretty steep tax on liquor, don’t ya?
there are health risks involved so why not tax the hell out of anybody that has sex unprotected? —advocating Big Brother, now?
The government is simply using people’s addiction to make money off of them, that is sick. —– This is sick? You’re indignation is about 50 years late. It’s been goin’ on for a Looooonnnngggggg time.
Comment by yep
July 16th, 2007 at 4:23 pmThe tax on tobacco is just like the lottery: a tax on stupid people.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:25 pmHoenig is a piece of garbage.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:25 pmWhat a retard.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:25 pmDial down the mean spirited tone somewhat, and I find myself actually agreeing a little with Patrick1 in #68.
I have to go lay down – I must be ill.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:25 pmUhhhh, I hope you didn’t expect to convey any new information there.
Comment by CT_V1 — July 16, 2007 @ 4:14 pm
Then why would you post such a stupid comment about taxing marijuana if you knew it was illegal? Just fess up. You didn’t know it was illegal.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:25 pm#71 “The tax on tobacco is just like the lottery: a tax on stupid people.”
The lottery = a math tax. It’s a tax for people who can’t do math.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:26 pmThis is a sick, stupid man.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:27 pm#71 “The tax on tobacco is just like the lottery: a tax on stupid people.â€
The lottery = a math tax. It’s a tax for people who can’t do math.
Comment by bobcat_grad — July 16, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
No – then it would only affect IMF economists…
July 16th, 2007 at 4:28 pmHaven’t read the posts, only saw the pic. This dude needs to be in a waaaaay-off-Broadway production of Grease. Looks like Fonzy. Also, I’d like to muss his hair real good.
Promoting smoking to kids – somebody should bust his ass.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:29 pm#78 Well, as all IMF economists can’t do math, not all people who can’t do math are IMF economists. Just some of them. ;)
July 16th, 2007 at 4:29 pmWorse yet is when they toss them out of the car windows and the still lit butts shower sparks and whatnot on, in and under my car. That really chaps my ass!
July 16th, 2007 at 4:30 pmAddiction= I am not responsible for my own actions? So you have to suffer the consequences for my bad decisions! The lefts battle cry.
In my state, we received over 600 million dollars from the big tobacco settlement. That money was supposed to go to educating people about the dangers of tobacco, and some health care programs. Instead, the money has been bonded and then used for things not related to it’s original purpose. A sham by lawyers and politicians to fleece “Big Corporations”
“More money is being spent to keep people addicted to smoking”, If you mean advertising, your right. Tobacco companies are also spending more money to help ther own consumers, smokers, quit buying the product they sell. Name one other company that does that? That is one reason you will never see legal sale of pot. The company that sells it would have to adhere to most laws and business models of the tobacco companies. Not much profit when you keep getting sued.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:34 pmWow, talk about a complete lack of understanding of rhetorical logic… sorry, was that too complicated too?
Let’s get down to basics, shall we?
Why is smoking bad? Health concerns, right? What kind of concerns? Oh right, black lungs, Emphazema (sic), thin blood, yadda yadda. Ok, so now we show how smoke hurts the body, or at least, impacts it in a negative way.
Hmm, so, we’re going to raise taxes on something that harms people to raise money for a program to help children receive health care. Sounds great doesn’t it? Buy why just the smokers? What of the coffee and tea drinkers, because you know, caffeine negatively affects the body, right? How about we raise taxes on alcohol, that negatively affects the body, right? What if we tax sun-bathers while we’re at it, since you know, too much UV can negatively affect the body too!
And if you’re going to start mumbling like a moron about how second-hand smoking affects those who don’t: yes, it does, but why should a person who lives alone and only smokes in his bedroom with the windows shut be forced to pay higher taxes on something?
You get my point. Sure, taxing things is a sure fire way to get money together for a program (though it doesn’t mean that money will go to that program’s beneficiaries), but how do you determine what to tax? If you’re only going to tax smokers, well, isn’t that discrimination, by definition, no matter if you like it or not? I mean, you are singling out a certain type of people, right?
These people who think health should be above civil liberties, and yes, smoking is a civil liberty, is just plain stupid.
This idea smells of the “War on Drugs”, tobacco, caffeine and alcohol just aren’t on that list, are they?
July 16th, 2007 at 4:35 pmSo that’s what happened to Eddie Munster! He changed his name to HOENIG.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:35 pmThat is one reason you will never see legal sale of pot. The company that sells it would have to adhere to most laws and business models of the tobacco companies. Not much profit when you keep getting sued.
Comment by Johnny Swank — July 16, 2007 @ 4:34 pm
They’d do it as a public service.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:36 pmAs for myself, I wouldn’t be opposed to “all Christians†having “to pay a surcharge for kids health care.â€
July 16th, 2007 at 4:37 pmLike racial discrimination? Don’t make me laugh. Smokers made a choice to smoke — and the number of them who started (and got addicted) before the Surgeon General warnings is dwindling. I am a smoker myself — started as a teenager. If I hadn’t started when I was young and stupid, I probably would never have started. Making a choice to smoke is very different from making a choice to quit — to suggest that people quit and spend their cigarette money on health care for children is simplistic and pompous.
That said — there are some arguments against more tobacco taxes that have nothing to do with comparing them to racial discrimination.
It’s true that hiking the price of cigarettes beyond the reach of teens means fewer of them take up the habit. But if health care is the issue, let’s also tax alcohol. We could save a few kids from being smashed by drunk drivers if it costs too much to get drunk, couldn’t we?
Obesity is also a big issue, leading to diabetes, premature heart failure and a host of other nasty things. Let’s save kids from this fate by taxing happy meals up the wazoo — this way they won’t get into the habit of burgers and fries.
And how about upping gasoline taxes? Think of the pollution children are being subjected to because of all our shiny carbon monoxide machines.
A caution, though — hiking the price too high will just create a black market for whatever product is being taxed. Then no tax money goes anywhere.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:38 pmTaxing a little bit is ok… but the taxing on tobacco is WAY overboard now… tabacco should be taxed just like any other non food product…. How is it any different than the tax on tea that the early Americans got real pissed off about? I dont smoke cigarrettes but I dont want to be singled out on my computer purchases or anything else I buy with an outrageous tax… it isnt right.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:38 pmformer smoker here… 6 years next month…
after 30+ years, 2 begging kids, countless “colds”,
many half hearted tries to quit… finally kicked with a
combo of zyban, bumming and determination
after watching my dad suffocate from emphysema…
hardest thing i EVER did…
i’d rather do childbirth, even at my age…
tax the shit out of the damn things…
quit subsidizing the tobacco farmers…
etc…
and, yes, tax the unhealthy fast food…
i hate to admit it, for many reasons, but patrick’s
“If you’re fat, you’re hurting my eyes”
cracked me up… but it’s true…
so i think droopy pants and certain facial area adornments
July 16th, 2007 at 4:44 pmshould be heavily taxed…
just sayin’…
Comment by Nat — July 16, 2007 @ 4:25 pm
Alrighty!
Thanks sooo much!!! Come again!
July 16th, 2007 at 4:45 pmSecondhand smoke is directly tied to ear infections in children. Watching someone eat a Big Mac will not make you obese. Someone please come up with a better comparison.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:47 pmIf you drive through a wooded area anywhere in the Western United States do NOT throw your lit ciggy butt out stupid.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:47 pmAlrighty!
Thanks sooo much!!! Come again!
Comment by CT_V1 — July 16, 2007 @ 4:45 pm
You’re welcome.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:48 pmThe right wing argument fall into two categories:
1. Individual rights – an individual has a right to do whatever they want as long as it harms no one else. The tax restricts those rights. RESPONSE:
A. Smoking does harm others. First and most directly is the impact of second hand smoke on others as has been documented through numerous peer reviewed articles. Second, those who smoke and are on medicaid or medicare pass those costs onto other tax payers. Are those opposing these measures willing to agree to charge those on medicare an increase in premiums sufficient to offset an actuarially sound estimate of additional medical costs? Third, this is not a restriction on personal liberty. The government has not outlawed smoking. It has levied a tax on it as it has on any number of items considered non essential. Indeed, sin taxes go back to the founding of the coutnry (Remember the Whiskey Rebellion?).
B. This is discrimination just the same as it is against Blacks. OH PULEASE! First, it is legal to discriminate against any group that is not in a protected class. For example, discrimination against homosexuals is perfectly legal. Indeed, the Bush administration specifically removed written regulations to protect federal employees against discrimination for being homosexuals. Discrimination on race, ethnicity, religion and politics (until this administration in civil service) are examples of protected classes. Second, I may be willing to change my position should those right wingers agree to join in an add published across the United States to say that discrimination against gays should be abolished.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:50 pmThat’s awful, Zoo. I smoke and have for 20 years. But I don’t EVER smoke in the house, the car, or anywhere around the kids. My sons Dr.s have constantly harassed me.
Comment by SGT Higgins
Right, so they should.
Every time I look at my mother, I see what smoking can do to you. She only smoked 5 years longer than you, so far….
July 16th, 2007 at 4:51 pmIf you’re old enough to buy a lottery ticket, then you’ve seen enough math in school to know that the lottery is stupid. Whether or not you were paying attention is your own problem. Lack of knowledge is no excuse.
Same with smoking. I like what the Europeans do, putting pictures of dying smokers on the packs. I’m NOT saying that I like anything else about what Europeans do, don’t read it like that.
Here’s a great idea: for each pack of smokes you buy, you have to work for an hour in a hospital ward where they treat dying smokers. We non-smokers should not bother giving medical assistance to smokers, let them take care of themselves.
I don’t think they should outlaw smoking, I just think that smokers should not burden the rest of us with their stupidity.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:51 pmAll of you that have posted here make many valid arguments on both sides. If i’m taxed one dollar for evey pack of smokes I buy, thats high, but basically accptable. And most of you do not smoke. But if I get taxed over one dollar for every gallon of gas I buy, that’s not high. Thats ok??? Are you kidding me? I’m strictly talking about taxes, not company profit. You spend twenty dollars on tax filling a twenty gallon tank. Ever notice when you get a bill for a service, there is always the amount you spent on taxes? Your laundry bill, restaurant bill, grocery bill, bathing suit bill…. But never on your gas bill. Why? Because you would be outraged. This country was basically created because of the price of tea, and the tax on it. Think people!
July 16th, 2007 at 4:53 pmSo the fact that it has been going on for 50 years makes it okay? Great reasoning there.
Comment by yep —– Nope! Never said it was ok. Just pointing out that your righteous indignation, your “how dare they’ attitude seems a little late to the show. What? Never heard of the tax on cigarrettes before?
July 16th, 2007 at 4:57 pmSecondhand smoke is directly tied to ear infections in children. Watching someone eat a Big Mac will not make you obese. Someone please come up with a better comparison.
Comment by ann — July 16, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
But if they’re gross enough, it might make you bulemic :)
A tax is not the answer. Fix health care, otherwise, somewhere along the line, you’re taking money from people who might need it, and giving it to people who might not, especially since the tax money ISN’T going to the places it was promised to. As a non-smoker, I will gladly pay higher taxes if people would just shut up about “My right to smoke and F*CK you if you’re bothered by it.” You smoke next to me, you bother me. If you don’t have the manners enough not to do that, then you don’t need to be there.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:57 pmRight, so they should. —- I agree.
She only smoked 5 years longer than you, so far…. —- I’ve quit 4 separate times now, I keep putting off another attempt. Might be time, huh?
Comment by Zooey
July 16th, 2007 at 4:58 pmI’ve quit 4 separate times now, I keep putting off another attempt. Might be time, huh?
Comment by SGT Higgins — July 16, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
Never been a better time, than right now.
–Red Hot Chile Peppers
:-)
July 16th, 2007 at 5:02 pmI’ve quit 4 separate times now, I keep putting off another attempt. Might be time, huh?
Comment by Zooey
Comment by SGT Higgins
If you’re really motivated, look into hypnosis. Worked for me back in 1979 (one of the reasons for quitting was that it looked like cigarettes might get up to a buck a pack) but for others, not so good. You really have to want to quit, I think, in order to the suggestion to work for you.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:02 pmIt’s worse than racial discrimination!
Comment by Mr. President
I know… it’s like picking on the stupid. Go ahead, son light up…
July 16th, 2007 at 5:04 pmIf you’re really motivated, look into hypnosis.
Comment by gummitch — July 16, 2007 @ 5:02 pm
I’m skeerrrd of hypnosis. I think that’s how we get trolls.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:04 pmJust about everyone who smokes thinks it’s okay to just toss those on the ground when they’re done… why?
Comment by bobcat_grad
Absolutely disgusting.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:06 pmTax on fat people, c’mon think about it people. Why bash smokers when fat people deserve the ridicule and scorn SO much more!!!!
A tax on stomach stapling medical procedures of $2K, or a liposuction tax. It’s just not fair to continue to ONLY pick on smokers, there are more undesirable people in this society to push around than just smokers. Think of all the tax revenue, we could pay for universal health care if we had a FAT PEOPLE TAX.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:07 pmOK, so when do we start taxing companies like McDonald’s and Coca-Cola for ruining our health, too?
Comment by Orejas
Amercians are probably the most overweight people on the planet.
They have to make hospital beds and coffins bigger these days… talking about lugging your fat a** around…
And a diabetes epidemic is coming at us like a tidal wave. Got a good answer for that, Ace?
July 16th, 2007 at 5:09 pmMy wife fell asleep with l lit smoke, and it caught her fur on fire, burned her alive.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:10 pmShave it, or don’t smoke.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:11 pmNever been a better time, than right now.
–Red Hot Chile Peppers
Comment by Zooey
Ok that was sexy. Did you do that on purpose? or did that just ‘happen’?
July 16th, 2007 at 5:12 pm“They have to make hospital beds and coffins bigger these days… talking about lugging your fat a** around…”
Have you seen the oversized toilets? I kid you not.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:13 pm“Just about everyone who smokes thinks it’s okay to just toss those on the ground when they’re done… why?
Comment by bobcat_grad”
And those butts aren’t biodegradable, either.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:14 pmWow – they’ve taught Mr. Peepers how to smoke!
July 16th, 2007 at 5:16 pmI always put ‘em out and throw ‘em away. I hated details where we had to pick up butts.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:17 pmOk that was sexy. Did you do that on purpose? or did that just ‘happen’?
Comment by SGT Higgins
Heh. Oh yeah, that just happens. Ask anyone. I’m all about the sexy.
*clearing throat*
Yeah.
Stop smoking, damn it!!
July 16th, 2007 at 5:17 pmBetter?
Just every thing the repukian idiots say and do show what total morons they are….knuckledraggers doesn’t even cover it.
Proud to be the total opposite of M12, Mr. P(rick), Butt Slush slurpy drinking CT_V1.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:20 pmObama, Turbin, and Tom Harkin won’t tolerate removal of their pork, errrr, farm subsidies!
Comment by m12
Substaniation, please!
The Commission’s report reflected a consensus among major tobacco grower organizations and the public health community on the details of a tobacco quota buyout and a restructuring of the federal tobacco program and on key public health measures, including U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority over manufactured tobacco products. The Commission’s recommendations have been widely accepted and endorsed by public health groups, tobacco farmer organizations, and many Members of Congress who work closely with the public health community, including Senators Edward Kennedy (D-MA), Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Richard Durbin (D-IL). Public health groups and tobacco grower organizations have since endorsed federal legislation to implement both the grower and public health recommendations of the Commission.
Obama doesn’t have anything to do w/ agricultural subsidies.
Try telling the truth if you want to be taken seriously, and not laughed at hysterically.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:20 pmBetter?
Comment by Zooey
gettin there….almost…….almost………
July 16th, 2007 at 5:21 pmHave you seen the oversized toilets? I kid you not.
Comment by ann
Rush Limbaugh probably has one.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:22 pmAnd those butts aren’t biodegradable, either.
Comment by ann
They’re full of toxic chemicals that leach out into the ground water.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:23 pmAs far as I’m concerned they can quadruple the cigarette tax. From my experience, smokers (generally) are among the most inconsiderate pigs on the planet.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:23 pmThey’re full of toxic chemicals that leach out into the ground water.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
In the Fl Keys, the key deer are actually addicted to nicotine from eating the butts on the side of the highway. Which leads to needless deaths of key deer from motorists when all the poor deer is trying to do is get a fix.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:29 pmMost smokers aren’t hopelessly obese. I’m sure there’s a fair amount of lard asses on this message board right now. My eyes would be less harmed by an average weight smoker than by an offensively fat person.
Something has to change and a fat tax could have a dramatic effect. Smokers are already a dying breed both litterally and in volume. Fat people are on a double digit increase, pretty soon there will be so many fat people everywhere that it will be TABOO to smack them with the ridicule they so richly deserve.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:30 pmCigarette smokers hate butts, because they stink.
Literally.
They all love the whiff of the first puff of the freshly lit cig,
which will then steadily increase its sour heaviness as the tars concentrate.
The filter becomes one more in a steadily mounting pile of reeking disgust.
So they throw them out.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:30 pmWhenever, and wherever they can.
The most inconsiderate pigs on the planet are the poor! Go to your local bad neighborHood and see for yourself. Trash everywhere.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:31 pmSarge, I got a real good way to get you to quit.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:31 pmI have some really gross pix of my chest tube scars, right after the tubes came out. Sure to make you quit, or barf, or both, not necessarily in that order.
Comment by RUCerious — July 16, 2007 @ 5:31 pm
lemme think about it for a few years, I’ll get back to you. lol
July 16th, 2007 at 5:34 pmI used to save my butts in my ashtray. Then my new car didn’t have an ashtray, so the roadway then became my ashtray. If you ask me, concrete laid everywhere is trash already because there’s nothing natural about it so what’s a little more trash piled on top of trash?
Bring back ashtrays and I will stop throwin the things out the window. That dry grass on the side of the road needed to be cut anyway.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:34 pmFat people are on a double digit increase, pretty soon there will be so many fat people everywhere that it will be TABOO to smack them with the ridicule they so richly deserve.
Comment by Patrick1
Hey, the Republicans have to coddle their base, however they can!
Keep ‘em fat, addicted to Wal-Mart
(because they have the fun little carts to ride around on)
and McDonalds
(because you don’t even have to get out of the car to get a gut full…)
If you don’t believe me, go ask Karl Rove.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:36 pmOr Uncle Dick.
this was funny
July 16th, 2007 at 5:38 pmgettin there….almost…….almost………
Comment by SGT Higgins
You’re going in the right direction, Sarge. :)
July 16th, 2007 at 5:39 pmComment by Jake — July 16, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
You are one selfish prick.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:39 pmSarge, I got a real good way to get you to quit.
I have some really gross pix of my chest tube scars, right after the tubes came out. Sure to make you quit, or barf, or both, not necessarily in that order.
Comment by RUCerious
Cool! Can you put them on facebook? :-D
July 16th, 2007 at 5:40 pmHey Raven,
Idaho is burning! Waaaahhh!!
July 16th, 2007 at 5:41 pmLet’s cut through all the bullcrap around here – for Bush, the republicans and the moronic members of his cult-of-death around here, it is more important to have cheap cigarrettes than to have healthcare for children. This is what has become of American conservatism. Teddy, Ike and Barry would be spinning in their graves.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:41 pmHoenig sets records as the dumbest talk show guest ever.
In most places, it’s against the law to light up in a closed environment.
They should have handcuffed his ass and forgot to push his head down as they tossed him in the back of the patrol car.
Comment by RUCerious — July 16, 2007 @ 3:33 pm
Sorry I’m late.
Let’s all do the progressive thing and advocate Police Brutality.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:42 pmYou are one selfish prick.
Comment by ann
And they say the younger generation has a massive sense of entitlement…..
July 16th, 2007 at 5:43 pmJake is a smartass that knows how to press yer buttons. He likes it.
Jake ya better not throw out yer lit butt near any forests, ass.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:43 pmIf you ask me, —- Must’ve missed that….did someone ask you?
concrete laid everywhere is trash already because there’s nothing natural about it —there’s nothing ‘natural’ about the car you drive in when you throw your butts out the window, might as well throw ‘em on the floorboard.
Bring back ashtrays — Buy one, loser or call Ford.
and I will stop throwin the things out the window. —- Eco-hostage taking, huh?
That dry grass on the side of the road needed to be cut anyway. —then get your mom to chew it back a bit.
Comment by Jake
July 16th, 2007 at 5:44 pmComment by RUCerious — July 16, 2007 @ 3:33 pm
How do you handcuff somebody’s ass? Have you ever seen a pair of handcuffs?
July 16th, 2007 at 5:44 pmPassing taxes on cigarettes so that smokers pay for the consequences of smoking is a good idea.
Passing taxes on fat people so that fat people pay for the consequences of being fat is a good idea. The government should mandate a body mass index (BMI) test at the grocery store. If your BMI is unhealthy, then you should pay an additional 10% fat tax. Fat people should also pay more for health insurance.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:44 pmAll TPers. Pray to your local weather god for continued thunder and lightning storms in VA.
Comment by RUCerious
Amen to that. Is it still storming? I’ll keep reading and measure the troll poop.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:46 pmI’ll bet Jake is obese, too. Just like his heros: Cheney, Rove, Hastert, DeLay.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:47 pmHow do you handcuff somebody’s ass?
Comment by Jake
Oh man, did that hurt? I’ve never watched anyone’s credibility nosedive quite so hard before. Why don’t you have your mom put a bandage on that?
July 16th, 2007 at 5:47 pmComment by SGT Higgins — July 16, 2007 @ 5:44 pm
You want me to buy a loser? Mmk, then can I buy you SGT Higgins? I don’t have any money, but I can trade you some cigs and a handfull of butts. It was enough to buy your mom.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:48 pmJake never saw Jackass the movie, he just looks in the mirror.
Anyway, Steve-O from the movie did have his ass cheeks pierced, so yes Jake, your ass could conceivably be handcuffed.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:48 pmThose Jackass homos are always doing things to their butts, but piercing, now you secular progressive libs have gone to far!
July 16th, 2007 at 5:50 pmI can just see mommy12 growing its cash crop in the back window of its trailer…
Comment by RUCerious
You know he still lives on that tobacco farm in Kentucky don’t you. Except for that small patch where he tries to grow his own weed.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:50 pmHi Zooey, sorry I can’t get there just yet, hopefully in a couple days another crew can be put together and I’ll be off again.
I need time enough to do the laundry, pay the phone bill, and water the squash.
(I had 2 1/2 hours notice on the last one, we worked a fire on the north rim of the Grand Canyon for 10 days.)
The National Preparedness Level is at 4 (out of 5)
This catagorization represents all Incident Response Teams, including other disasters such as tornados, floods, hurricanes, etc.,
in relation to current “incidents”….
“4″ is like “oh no….”
“5″ is like “holy sh!t……..”
Here’s an interesting site to give you a glimpse :
July 16th, 2007 at 5:50 pmLook up “Inciweb National Incidents”
Comment by Jake — July 16, 2007 @ 5:48 pm
check out an online resource and learn what a comma means. Then come back and try to typea fairly rational thought.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:52 pmSmoking only hurts the smoker and the unborn fetus. Well it probably doesn’t hurt the blastocyst so the Republicans won’t care.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:54 pmtypea huh? I’ll remember that.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:54 pmyeah, no worries, brother. Don’t worry, you could tie a plastic bag FILLED with smoke around your head for like, 30 minutes and you’d be fine.
Comment by SGT Higgins
KIDS, PLEASE DON’T TRY THIS AT HOME.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:56 pmYou’ll have to talk to the Democratic majority. Obama, Turbin, and Tom Harkin won’t tolerate removal of their pork, errrr, farm subsidies!
Comment by m12
UR12, Obama and Durbin are in Illinois. I’ve been here 53 years and haven’t seen a tobacco crop yet. Nice try though, idiot.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:58 pmKIDS, PLEASE DON’T TRY THIS AT HOME.
Comment by shane — July 16, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
I guess that sarcasm didn’t quite make it through, huh?
btw, does anybody ELSE suspect that Jake is Joker on valium?
July 16th, 2007 at 5:58 pmAnti-Smoking regulations are dumb, the only thing dumber are people who smoke American “taylor mades”. Full of poison. I stopped years ago and only smoked Brits or Canadian or Danish. Now I roll my own filter tipped. I think we need to worry about HEALTH CARE for ALL Americans. I have no problem with the tax on Cigarettes, even if it effects my bulk tobacco but I think all of this nonsense just misses the point.
1. Second hand tobacco smoke probably isn’t helpful, but it is a major distration from real pollutants.
2. Silly rules and regulations re: smoking are only giving government and the left a bad name. Leave it up to individuals, employers, bar owners, etc. Public buildings, sure. I’m a left libertarian. What can I say?
3. Screw all this BS! Everyone should have health care! Whether they drink cyanide daily or herbal tea.
Jonathon Hoenig is a racist pig!
Check out the comments left at Amazon about his books.
I’ve had my say
July 16th, 2007 at 5:59 pmHere’s an interesting site to give you a glimpse :
Look up “Inciweb National Incidentsâ€
Comment by Raven — July 16, 2007 @ 5:50 pm
Thanks, Raven. Take as much time as you need. :)
July 16th, 2007 at 5:59 pmI really don’t think it’s up to the government to try and discourage or encourage behavior when it comes to health. That’s a personal matter between an individual and their doctor… so I’m not really for taxing cigarettes regardless of how good it makes people feel and so people can cheer about “discouraging unhealthy habits”… What’s next? Banning red meat and sweets… the day will probably come, unfortunately…
July 16th, 2007 at 6:00 pmUmm, Jake, when you start talking about “homos,” you’re not on very solid ground as a conservative. McCain’s co-chair in Florida just got busted trying to give an undercover cop (a male) a bj, let’s not forget Bush’s trusted advisor on religion who was snorting speed and getting it on with a male whore and then there’s the strange story of the Whitehouse stayovers by male whore Jeff Guckert. I guarantee you Guckert wasn’t servicing a secular progressive in Bush’s Whitehouse. We know all we need to know about you. Cheap cigarettes are more important to you than healthcare for children. Now crawl back into your strange, dark hole.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:01 pmWell why don’t they legalize marijuana AND tax it?
Comment by arsemann
Because that wouldn’t be good for all those banks that launder money down in Texas. Like in Laredo that’s a little nothing town with great big bank buildings.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:02 pmCigarettes are juiced with amonia. This has the effect of delivering the nicotine to the body much faster in a very similar way to which freebasing crack cocaine delivers that drug faster. Cigarettes are very much like crack tobacco. On the other hand, they only hurt the user, any fetus in the user and anybody in the same room or building as the user, so no problem, right Bushies. It’s much more important to keep them inexpensive than to pay for healthcare for children, right?
July 16th, 2007 at 6:04 pm“You’ll have to talk to the Democratic majority. Obama, Turbin, and Tom Harkin won’t tolerate removal of their pork, errrr, farm subsidies!
Comment by m12 ”
Puhleeze. Tobacco subsidies are what kept Jesse Helms in office all those years.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:05 pmAdam: “I really don’t think it’s up to the government to try and discourage or encourage behavior when it comes to health.”
What part of “We the people…” and “promote the general welfare…” don’t you understand?
July 16th, 2007 at 6:05 pmCheap cigarettes are more important to you than healthcare for children.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — July 16, 2007 @ 6:01 pm
No, not really. I think Patrick1 is right on the money though. Post #124. You libs can be elitist against a segment of the population and fund universal health care all at the same time. A win win. My only thought on the subject of smoking is that until the day it’s made illegal, nobody has a legitimate reason to whine about smokers. Quit bashing us, we pay plenty of taxes already.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:08 pmBeware the unintended consequences. Yes, raising cigarette taxes by 75¢ will discourage youth smoking. But it will encourage cigarette smuggling and black market dealing. Witness Manhattan Island, where taxes cause cigarettes to be over $7.50 a pack. Meanwhile, in nearby tobacco-farmer friendly Virginia, taxes on cigarettes are nearly nothing. This provides enough profit incentive for criminals to load up a van full of Virginia smokes and drive ‘em to New York City, where than van load will reap a $50,000 profit on the streets, even if they sell for less than $7.50 a pack. Criminals exploiting this loophole don’t check kids for ID and tend to get violent when they fight over distribution turf.
It’s a drug, smokers are addicted, and prohibition of drugs, whether outright or through exhorbitant taxation, always leads to crime and violence.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:11 pmTHIS IS A LOAD OF CRAP! tax the polluters to fund children’s health care. or better yet, let’s have single-payer, universal health care. it matters not how revolting you may find smoking, it doesn’t justify burdening smokers with the funding health care for children.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:11 pmi agree that ‘Hoenig sets records as the dumbest talk show guest ever.’ not only that but he has to be one of the most unattractive people i’ve ever seen in my life. which may be why he acts like such an attention seeking asshole.
Here’s the difference, to all the geniuses who are comparing being ”offended” by fat people vs. smokers: Smoking really harms other people, e.g. their HEALTH. Health, you idiots. And you being ‘offended’ by fat people – that’s your perception and opinion, which can be changed and sounds like it NEEDS to. Also sounds like you are extremely petty and narrow-minded. And don’t even try to argue back with “oh sounds like you must be fat for saying that!” cuz i’m actually perfectly within my weight range, if not under (try 5′1″, 110 lbs). I think it’s sooo funny when people think they are being logical when really it’s not at all – they just can’t stretch their minds outside of the narrow box they live in! So thanks for the laugh.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:14 pmYes i think it’s sad that the system is designed to make poor people unhealthy (bad food is usually the cheapest option, eg mcdonald’s dollar menu) but if bad food is taxed, many people will have a harder time putting food on the table for themselves and their kids. Which doesn’t help anybody. However, taxing smokers….no one is going to be harmed by that. I’m not saying it’s easy to quit…but you do make the choice. And i’ve read on here people who have tried to quit – i understand but if it was between eating and smoking, especially if you had kids, i’m sure you would pick eating. I hope. Or you just might be too stupid and shouldn’t have kids ever.
The dangers of second-hand smoke are well-documented; they cost hundreds of millions per year via healthcare costs and lost or less productive work. That’s not “sound science”, it’s the real thing.
Fox, as is typical for all Murdoch media, is funding lies for its contributors and supporters. Kinda like the GOP.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:20 pmKIDS, PLEASE DON’T TRY THIS AT HOME.
Comment by shane — July 16, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
I guess that sarcasm didn’t quite make it through, huh?
btw, does anybody ELSE suspect that Jake is Joker on valium?
Comment by SGT Higgins
I got it but I figured the trolls never would. Neocons aren’t good with the humor thing. And all those shows like Scarred and Jackass where kids try to do really stupid things, you know their folks are Republicans. Sorry Sarge, just the facts.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:22 pmNot all of us smokers are inconsiderate pigs. When I smoke in my car, I use the ashtray. When I smoke outside, I stand away from other people. And I don’t crush my cigarette butt out on the ground. I have found that an empty Altoids box makes a great portable ashtray.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:24 pmQuit bashing us, we pay plenty of taxes already.
Comment by Jake
And Jake, if you send us your address we’ll all send you a pack of cigarettes. Anything to hasten your demise.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:26 pmHow do you handcuff somebody’s ass? Have you ever seen a pair of handcuffs?
Comment by Jake
If someone handcuffs you Jake they are handcuffing an ass
July 16th, 2007 at 6:27 pmJust saying.
Russ, this is a federal tax. It would be applied across the board, so your examples are irrelevant. And, again, all this shows is that for the modern corporate conservative Bush apologist, cheap cigarettes are more important than healthcare for children.
Jake, I can understand how an addict would be worried and concerned that the cost of his drug might go up, especially in the case of the most addictive substance known to man. I’ve worked with addicts before and I’m sorry about your addiction. But, as an American who still remembers the preamble to our constitution, I believe it is consistent with “promoting the general welfare” to discourage Americans from being addicted to this killer drug and to provide healthcare for our children. There’s nothing “elitist” about providing for the general welfare. It’s an American value as best expressed by our Founders.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:27 pmI smoke cigarettes and live in iowa. This year iowa raised the tobacco taxes in order to, yes, pay for health care. and guess what, one of my friends who wanted to quit for a while quit. I dont want to, so I didnt. I pay more for my cigarettes but really, is there more of a luxury item than cigarettes? This whole “controversy” sounds to me like blindly saying “no more taxes urrggg” without even thinking about what’s actually going on.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:47 pmbreathing smog is more harmful then second hand smoke.
cigs in CA are 5 dollars a pack. The majority of smokers are poor. It’s a sneaky way of taxing the poor.
wake up. tax chevron and halliburton. not more taxes on the poor.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:48 pmAgain, to the sick, fallen excuse for a human being who continues to use every method possible to protect Bush, cheap cigarrettes are more important than healthcare for children. No matter how many times I repeat that, I still can’t quite get my brain around it. How far do conservatives have to fall into an abyss of sociopathic, inhuman, unamerican behavior before they look at themselves in the mirror and say, once and for all, “enough!”
July 16th, 2007 at 6:53 pmAdam: “I really don’t think it’s up to the government to try and discourage or encourage behavior when it comes to health.â€
What part of “We the people…†and “promote the general welfare…†don’t you understand?
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper
Are you kidding?
The early Americans had a REVOLT against GEORGE WASHINGTON over moonshine being taxed… you think they would buy todays BS about being about to tell people when and where they could smoke?
Life is NOT heaven… we get skin cancer from the sun…. yet we dont outlaw the sun… (oh excuse me …encourage the sun not to shine on us) …. this is just like every other nazisitic BS that people use government for… I have never smoke a cigarrette in my life but I have been around those that do my whole life and I never felt a tear come to my eye over the “harm” they were causing me or my children…
If it isnt people being idiots in the “right” direction they are being idiots in the “left” direction… dont like the smell of smoke? Grow a pair.
July 16th, 2007 at 7:01 pmWhat an ASS
July 16th, 2007 at 7:03 pmFunny, he says you’re not allowed to eat faux gras anymore. But in fact, faux gras, if such at thing exists, would be legal. It’s foie gras that has been banned. Still, I have to admire stickin’ it to the man with the smoking indoors on camera. Wonder if anybody wrote him a ticket?
July 16th, 2007 at 7:08 pmSomething has to change and a fat tax could have a dramatic effect. Smokers are already a dying breed both litterally and in volume. Fat people are on a double digit increase, pretty soon there will be so many fat people everywhere that it will be TABOO to smack them with the ridicule they so richly deserve.
Comment by Patrick1 — July 16, 2007 @ 5:30 pm
That would be thanks to the horrible food in this country. You know, the fast food full of garbage, artificial colors and flavors that are outlawed in much of the world (or at least recommended against ingesting), the trans fats, the high-fructose corn syrup, etc. You know, all the stuff that Big Food keeps pushing through the FDA wholesale (since that particular organization has been left unable to do its job during the Bush years). That shit-for-food that Big Food uses to cut corners to increase their (yup…you guessed it…PROFITS). It is in Big Food’s interest to use the cheapest, shittiest substitutes possible for, well, everything.
Ohhhhh, yeah. All this “junk food” also just so happens to be the “cheap” option for food. To buy good vegetables, decent meat, and so on, is far, far costlier than buying a bunch of crappy junk food. Food has also been rising in price faster than oil under this administration. So, a tax on obesity-causing foods will generally be a tax on the lower and middle class.
What…a…surprise! Except when it’s not. Ahhhhh, corruption, greed and bribery. Doesn’t it just make you want to vomit? Kind of like the food most Americans eat, eh?
July 16th, 2007 at 7:18 pmChoam Nomsky does not want kids to smoke!!!!
July 16th, 2007 at 7:26 pmPeople who play sports — dangerous ones or otherwise — are a burden on the system. Make them pay more taxes too. Same with fat people — so we need a fat tax. Booze drinkers. And so on. An endless list of other activities the health police decide to be a “burden.” Even child birth is a burden to the system — I don’t plan on having kids, why should I pay for it with my taxes, having a child is a luxery, they can pay the whole ticket themselves.
July 16th, 2007 at 7:39 pmGerald Gibson, “moonshine,” as you call it, is and has been heavily taxed for quite some time now with no revolts, this has absolutely nothing to do with sunshine, providing funds to pay for healthcare for children is not “nazisitic BS,” and the fact that you have never worried about the harm second hand smoke does to your children says more about you than anything else.
For someone suggesting I “grow a pair,” you sure are hysterical about the simple idea that we would add taxes to cigarettes to pay for healthcare for children. You sure sound like a nicotine slave to me.
“Those nicotine slaves are all the same,
July 16th, 2007 at 7:43 pmAt a pettin party or a poker game
Everything’s gotta stop while they smoke that cigarette.”
This is a blatant mugging of smokers by the American people, using government-forced taxation as the weapon. The government was not designed to be brandished against fellow Americans in this way. A warning: Today it is smokers, tomorrow it could be you.
July 16th, 2007 at 7:47 pmHe’s absolutely right, this is just another form of discrimination.
also, when ferris says “They don’t have the right to raise my health insurance bill because that’s what they’re doing right now” he’s full of shit. The insurance companies are raising your bill, not the smokers, if you don’t like it go take it up with them!
July 16th, 2007 at 7:49 pmThe smokers are just the scapegoat the insurance companies use to make more money off of your dumb ass.
People who have children need to be responsible and pay for the insurance themselves. It is insane to think that other people should have to pay for their children’s insurance. If they can’t afford it, they shoudn’t be having children. Seems this nation has become a gang of do-nothing parents who think tax payers should subsidize their poor decisions. IF more taxes are applied to tobacco, that money should go directly to help the smokers themselves and no one else.
July 16th, 2007 at 7:59 pmWhile I do believe its stupid to think we can leverage all sorts of goverment programs on tobacco its more stupid to equate smoking with race.
I guess the NeoNuts think you can cure Teh Gay, but not tobacco addiction. They never do let fact get in the way do they…
July 16th, 2007 at 8:04 pmGot a light?
July 16th, 2007 at 8:12 pmSmokers, AGAIN, are being unfairly treated. It is wrong to think that smokers have to PAY for this bill. What about drinkers? Why not tax the hell out of alcohol? How many drunk driving deaths have you read about this week? The tobacco companies coughed up billions of dollars in a major lawsuit—how did the states use that money? It sure as hell wasn’t for the prevention of smoking. Hell no, it went to fix roads, shelter homeless, job training and on and on. And just where do you think this extra tax money is going to wind up. Oh sure, some for the kids but don’t think that every legislator isn’t going to have his hand in the till.
I am in the process of quitting and hoping many more smokers do the same. So who the hell is going to pay the bills when the number of smokers continues to decline??? and they are declining.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:12 pmIf you think that kids should have healthcare, you are free to contribute as much of your money as you want to the cause. You are free to use your freedom of speech to convince your fellow citizens to contribute their money. You are free to start a charity and ask for donations.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:19 pmHowever, the moment you decide to hold a gun to the head of your neighbors and take their hard earned money to fund your charity, you cross a moral and ethical line. Slavery was immoral in the south 150 years ago, and enslaving your neighbors to pay for your little pet projects is just as immoral.
#165 Comment by Jake — July 16, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
My only thought on the subject of smoking is that until the day it’s made illegal, nobody has a legitimate reason to whine about smokers. Quit bashing us, we pay plenty of taxes already.
Your only thought on the subject?! Yeah, that fits you Jake. No thought at all really. Just automatic knee jerk reaction from Jake the automaton.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:21 pmYep, just typical selfish drivel heard mostly from Ayn Rand devotees. You can do anything you want whether it hurts someone else or not.
He was right to compare smoking to other forms of discrimination. Politics is really all about powerful groups going after less powerful groups. In the past, blacks and women had little political power, which made them ripe targets for discrimination and economic oppression. Today, oil companies, smokers, and others are politically weak and unpopular, making them ripe targets for looters who know how to use the political system to steal.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:22 pmChemically manipulated cigarettes and tobacco designed to increase addictiveness should be banned worldwide. Currently, cigarette companies are pushing their products in third world countries where laws regarding age are not present or not enforced. It’s as immoral as pushing heroin.
Organic cigarettes and tobacco should be phased in over the period of a year and chemically manipulated cigaretts should be phased out. And taxes should be raised.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:47 pmRet. Col. Jack Ripper – The part where individual rights are concerned. The part where the government doesn’t tell a business how to determine the health of their patrons (don’t like it, don’t go there, what part of that isn’t understood?)
July 16th, 2007 at 8:50 pmI don’t think they should outlaw smoking, I just think that smokers should not burden the rest of us with their stupidity.
Smokers don’t burden us at all. It’s the old 90 year olds with a million dollars in joint replacements and another million in hospital stays that are bankrupting the system.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:14 pmTell him to keep puffing.
One less clown we have to deal with.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:17 pmI believe it is consistent with “promoting the general welfare†to discourage Americans from being addicted to this killer drug and to provide healthcare for our children.
Too bad you’re too dumb to realize that discouraging Americans from smoking takes away the funding for that healthcare.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:20 pmHarkin, Obama, and Biden pushed for their ethanol subsidies just last Congress!
http://www.agweb.com/get_article.aspx?pageid=133656&src=gennews
July 16th, 2007 at 9:25 pmi smoke, but that’s no one’s concern but my own. the individual is the smallest minority and it’s the role of the government to protect the interests of the minority from the majority. therefore it would go against the morals of anyone who values individual rights to support the imposition of legislated morality. as well, insurance in the united states is like paying monthly for access to a club you’ll almost never visit, and when you do visit, having to pay for all the services anyway. why not just invest that money in bonds or trusts for that rainy day? instead of trying to coerce people’s behavior, why not create a working institution that adapts to it?
July 16th, 2007 at 9:25 pmOf course a majority of Americans favor a tax on cigarettes to pay for kid’s health insurance, a majority of Americans will never have to pay the tax! When a majority group supports imposing a tax or a law that will benefit them at the expense only of a minority group, that action is illegitimate. Bush SHOULD veto this proposal!
If lawmakers really feel the need to address the health costs associated with smoking, they should pass a law allowing insurance companies, and requiring medicare/medicaid, to exclude smoking related health problems from coverage. Then impose a tax on cigarettes to support a supplemental health program to cover smoking related illnesses. Instead of pulling the same old “for the children” BS that seems to lead the way for every shady new proposal.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:32 pm“Taxes from tobacco should go to tobacco related illnesses only.
Comment by LandSurveyor “
Oh really. Do you have any idea how much we have to pay so you can smoke? Here’s something to chew on:
http://www.ispub.com/ostia/index.php?xmlFilePath=journals/ijh/vol3n2/smoking.xml
So, please tell me why taxing cigarettes to fund children’s health projects, projects that we would have money to fund if so much wasn’t drained off by smokers, is wrong or even discriminatory.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:34 pm$150b is nothing…Medicare alone is $400b a year!
July 16th, 2007 at 9:43 pm“Promote the general welfare” was never intended to give the government unlimited power to perform any function that could conceivably benefit someone. Using that logic, the remainder of the Constitution is rendered completely unnecessary. They could have drafted the Preamble and gone home.
The Constitution is a limiting document, meaning that the government is allowed to perform those functions expressly stated, and no more. “General welfare” is not intended to expand power, but to limit it. The government cannot do ANYTHING it wants that might be argued to promote general welfare, but rather may perform ONLY those functions that that benefit everyone without singling out individuals or groups for special treatment. For example taxing only smokers to fund health care only for children.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:50 pmHoenig is a pig and an idiot. Smokers affect everyone. The costs in dollars are astronomical, second hand smoke not only kills, it’s downright disgusting. A large percentage of smokers use the world as their personal ashtray. If there were any justice, tobacco would be illegal and pot would be sold and taxed to the heavens. Someone needs to shove that lit cig up that fool’s nose. A tax may not be any answer, but if it prevents another new smoker and generates cash from an unhealthy, disgusting habit-go for it. I’m for a 150% tax increase, myself.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:52 pmFiguring “lost productivity” into an estimate of smoking related costs is disingenuous, and serves only to inflate the numbers and inject hyperbole into the argument.
Otherwise, I shudder to imagine the costs that would be estimated based on the tremendous economic burden that is the Internet.
July 16th, 2007 at 9:56 pmI think Hillary ‘08 bumper stickers are disgusting and offensive. If I can rally a majority to agree with me, should we be allowed to impose a $6 per sticker tax on them?
July 16th, 2007 at 9:59 pmI think Hillary ‘08 bumper stickers are disgusting and offensive. If I can rally a majority to agree with me, should we be allowed to impose a $6 per sticker tax on them?
Hey, somebody has to pay for BankruptcyCare!
It’s not the 40% that pay almost nothing in taxes, it’s not the 16% that dodge their taxes, it’s not Kerry, and it’s not Edwards.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:02 pm“However, the moment you decide to hold a gun to the head of your neighbors and take their hard earned money to fund your charity…” ???!!!
holy cow! wackier every time!
how wacky can it get?!?!
are the PRIVATE schools teaching these young punks
July 16th, 2007 at 10:05 pmthese ideas of community spirit and civic pride?
yeesh…
Brian, I actually agree with the idea that items like cigarettes, etc, should not be taxed any more than any other product. If the tax the company pays, and the sales tax on the cigarettes isn’t enough, tough shit. This would be one of those, “stay out of my life” items. Private business can prohibit smoking on their premises if they so desire, for that is the right of private property.
Now, if the War on Drugs weren’t going on, and we weren’t sending billions of dollars per year, tax free, overseas to drug lords, we’d have all that extra money in our coffers. Moreover, we’d have a huge influx into the workforce, ready to legally make money off of these substances. We’d also have Big Pharma legitimately researching the medical uses for these substances. We’d also have a tremendous decrease in spending on law enforcement and correctional facilities, and have the luxury of closing half of the existing facilities down for lack of prisoners to fill the space. You know, rather than for-profit correctional facilties, who have a vested interest in INCARCERATING MORE PEOPLE, REGARDLESS OF GUILT.
Paying extra taxes on any such item? Utter nonsense, and the government has no right to interfere.
The “what about the children” argument is the closest you can possibly come to a legitimate counter, certainly more convincing than the $150 billion price-tag cited above. How much do you want to bet that problems stemming from diet have a greater impact economically on society? However, even then, I think the sanctity of a citizen on private property, in their private lives, takes precedence. Sorry.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:11 pmYikes, these nicotine addicts really get hysterical when someone suggests raising taxes on their drug. “To promote the general welfare” is not in any way, shape or form a “limiting” statement. It means what it says. We have a secular, civil government by, for and of the people which is designed to promote the general welfare among the people.
And, it’s not “me, the individual,” it’s “we, the people.” If we, the people decide to raise taxes on cigarettes, that’s what we, the people will do. If you don’t like it, kick the f*cking habit, addicts.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:16 pmFor the record, I do not smoke cigarettes, I have never smoked cigarettes and I never will. I personally find the practice to be pretty gross. But, if someone wants to inhale on a cancer stick, and they are of age, and they are not on private property, they should be allowed to do so.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:24 pm@Ret. Col. Jack Ripper,
First, I’m actually not a smoker.
Second, the Constitution’s entire purpose is as a limiting document. Writings and letters by the people who wrote the Constitution consistently bear this out.
James Madison himself wrote that the “general welfare†clause was not intended to give Congress a blank check “to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare.â€
If the Founding Fathers had meant to justify any and all economic and social programs that Congress might want to create, they would have had no reason to list specific powers of Congress such as establishing courts and maintaining the armed forces. Those powers would simply have been granted by one all-encompassing phrase, to “promote the general welfare.â€
Further, while the Founders recognized the value of social order, they believed that the rights of the individual are paramount, and that government is a necessary evil that was required to secure those individual — natural — rights. They had no intent to create a socialist egalitarian society, or to grant limitless power to a central authority. They had intimate knowledge of the corrupting influence of power, and their desire was to control it, not to set it free.
July 16th, 2007 at 10:32 pmwould humphry bogart been the same in Casablanca if not for that lingering trail of cool flavored smoke surrounding him?
July 16th, 2007 at 10:59 pmI am a fan of this law! I find it wonderful that modern day America is adapting law that I designed for the Third Reich! I am an avid anti-smoker and totally support the leftist ideals of empowering government while oppressing the dreaded smokers! Sieg Heil! The Nazi Party is alive and well, Der Tag für Freiheit und für Brot bricht an! Bald flattern Hitlerfahnen über Barrikaden
July 16th, 2007 at 11:11 pmSure, smoke all the f__ck you want to. Just make sure a) the shit does not get into my lungs, bloodstream, organs and 2) you put into the kitty what your inevitably going to take out someday when you get sick from the addiction. Oh, and don’t smoke if you are pregnant, nursing, etc. or in front of small kids. Most smokers refuse to acknowledge these basic decencies/logic. So government has to protect us from these scum buckets. The cancer companies love you. Oh, and if your a healthy non smoker under thirty, you’ll likely be paying for the medical bills of all of the smokers who are puffing and coughing right now because no one is putting anything into any damned kitty right now. So, the system will break in about 20 years. So stay healthy !!
July 16th, 2007 at 11:38 pmTruth is, the states love nicotine addicts. Taxes on cigarettes bridge spending gaps. The big settlements have already been spent and we export death all over the planet. Yeeeeaaaah. Voters are too dumb to see that ultimately, more and more cancer patients will break the system. No one gives a shit. The answer is to get a cash hoard together, get a boat, sail away and f__ckin faggetaboutit… Yaaa.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:45 pmComment by By By.. — July 16, 2007 @ 11:38 pm
Very well said. I live in NH and for reasons unknown some folks ride motorcycles without helmets while claiming to “live free”. It’s ridiculous.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:48 pmHoenig better be careful. I’ve heard smoking can stunt your growth! I think he just got his pubes last month, so if he wants his voice to change to that of an adult male he should quit.
July 17th, 2007 at 12:38 amThis video was awesome. Even though he misquoted Lucky Strike’s Motto (It’s “Lucky Strike means Fine Tobacco” not “Lucky Strike means Good Tobacco”), that was just such an awesome moment.
218 comments, didn’t read all of them, but the issue is simple. The federal government does not, in the SLIGHTEST, have the authority to do this. And, while the comments in the video may be misdirected, they still ring true. Why smokers? Sure, it’s not the same as being black, but it’s discrimination nonetheless. It’s targeting a certain group of people for no reason.
Why not raise taxes on Gasoline? It’d decrease emissions and lead to greater general health. Or what about Alcohol? Hell, even things like Soda, in all their surgary sweetness, could be cut back on (and if you decrease soda consumption, you decrease all that waste). Or hey, you could be fair and impose a federal sales tax, so everything we pay for costs more.
It doesn’t sound so good when you have to pay more for something YOU use, huh?
**** Democrats, **** Republicans, who cares what side you’re on. It’s an unwarranted attack on a group of people that steps outside the powers of the federal government.
July 17th, 2007 at 2:59 amOh golly gee! This will get the Ministry of Truthiness on Fox NEWS tail one more time with the breathless nitwittery the bureauninnies are known for.
July 17th, 2007 at 3:04 amIf you’re in a bar and you want to smoke but other people don’t like it, leave. Go poison yourself at home.
July 17th, 2007 at 4:02 amSomeone should tell that guy that only cool people smoke.
Why’s that guy smoking, he doesn’t look cool, he looks like a lil nerd. Everyone knows that only cool people smoke, not NERDS!!!!
July 17th, 2007 at 6:14 amSomeone explain to me how the hell progressive is considered PRO-Choice?
July 17th, 2007 at 7:03 amLiberal is certainly a misnomer for you fascist thugs. Have the balls to try and outlaw it. Otherwise leave your Orwellian authoritarian tyrannical dreams in the pages of a book.
July 17th, 2007 at 8:13 amTo By By…
You are correct in that smoking isn’t a healthy pastime, and that people do get sick and even die from smoking related illness. But your post seems to imply that non-smokers never get sick and aren’t a drain on the health care system.
The number of hospital stays are about the same for smokers and non-smokers — with the non-smokers even edging out the smokers slightly with more hospital stays per lifetime. Why? Because non-smokers live longer. They are more likely to get Alzheimers, degenerated and broken bones, and other conditions of the elderly merely because they live long enough to get them.
The cruel truth is that we ALL die. And many of us, whether we are dying at 50 or we are dying at 90, will die after one or more long expensive hospital stays, surgeries, or in an expensive nursing home.
Smoking isn’t healthy. That’s true. But non-smokers shouldn’t feel that their health care dollars are going ONLY toward the consequences of smoker irresponsibility.
July 17th, 2007 at 8:19 amI can’t believe the utter fascist train of thought on this issue. You damn non-smokers are as bad as the neo-cons that used to do drugs when they were kids but grew up to think it should be outlawed(or even worse never did it and know it’s bad from only being told it’s bad). You, nor I, nor anyone has the right to tell someone else they can’t experience something. The only exception to the rule is if what they are doing is directly hurting someone else and that person is unable to remove themselves from that situation. Healthcare costs rising because one person is too fat… the same as insurance rates rising because people don’t know how to drive… yes it sucks and the only way to fix it is for society to see the problem and then wok together to fix it not force their views on each other, that’s fascist and frankly more than a little childish. Grow up.
July 17th, 2007 at 11:46 amI’m getting tired of people attacking anyone who disagrees with them. Jonathan believes strongly in the rights of individuals not being controlled by the state, yet instead of debating the issue of what our government should be allowed to regulate, he is attacked as not wanting to help poor children, or simply being called stupid.
There are good reasons that could be debated for the morality of the Government regulating tobacco, illegal drugs, and other controversial matters. Stop attacking each other and actually talk about the issues at hand! Solving problems is a lot tougher than fighting like children, but if you want anything productive to happen it is worth the extra effort.
July 17th, 2007 at 12:56 pmok so now we have million of non smokers and the tax base is running out.
July 17th, 2007 at 3:26 pmDo we now raise the tax on alocohol it causes death and destruction and presents a health problem. Now lets talk about the next tax for health program you can come up with. There are low income famlies in my neighborhood that cant afford insurance but they also cant cover their kids
because they make just enough to survive.
“i’m a red meat American, and dammit, i’m going to get my back scratched, my palm greased, my ego stroked, and i’m going to be told what I want to hear…what’s that station, honey? Fox?”
July 17th, 2007 at 11:11 pmIf i dont smoke i am schizohprenic this is bad
i dont have to pay taxes on cigaret because of this
i think it is overlooked that there are certin good effects besdes the enjoyable effects as well as bad
if you dont like this then too bad suck my ashes
July 18th, 2007 at 10:22 pmThere are NO subsidies for tobacco. The price supports are gone.
July 29th, 2007 at 7:56 amI have read 233 of these comments, only #232 speaks of mental illnesses and their connection with tobacco usage. #232 said he is schizophrenic. 90% of low-income schizophrenics smoke, 50-60% of bipolars. Pretty much all of the mentally ill are low income, and we need cigarettes to manage our illnesses. Nicotine corrects our neurotransmitters and keep us sane. It is true, even studies against smoking will give cigarettes the credit for doing this,; it is about the only way schizophrenics can stop hearing the voices that torment them. It calms us down and controls anger, anxiety, and interestingly enough hunger , which we have plenty of because we cannot afford food with these taxes. I haven’t had a hospitilization in 15 years which is monumental and I never could have done it without my cigarettes.
Why should I pay for the medical costs for middle class children? If it’s so bad, why on earth can’t the upper class be taxed on their yachts and luxuries to pay for it? I smoke and I keep myself out of the institutions. Saves the government money, don’t you think? We, the mentally ill, should not have to pay taxation on tobacco at all because it is a medication same as our pills. Their are many studies which confirm what I write about the mental health benefits of nicotine.
The patch and the gum don’t cut it. Cigarettes are the best delivery system for nicotine to the brain, in only 8 seconds. That’s handy because we get it right away when we need it, to get out of sticky situations where we can just make an exit in these days. And it suffices.
Nicotine helps schizophrenics, bipolars, depression, psychological distress, Alzeihmer’s, Parkinson’s, and Tourette’s Syndrome, and .AADD. It also helps cure an immune problem called sepsis which kills 250,000 people a year.
It’s a medication. It should not be taxed at all. Health costs? Many of the people above had comments to say about sky divers and such. THe FDA regulations they are proposing to go for a decrease in nicotine. Just great. So now we’ll be forced to buy more cigarettes to get our fix. Lower the tar which causes cancer, heart attack,etc. fine. It wouldn’t taste as good, you say? Then allow the tobacco companies to flavor the tobacco
like we flavor coffee. OH no, FDA says no to that.
I like smoking. I don’t want to quit. I like kids but I am low class and feel the high class should pay for their medical costs, not us. I have trouble getting food on the table and feel that is where the illnesses caused by tar originate from. And if we die early, in our lifestyle, it’s a kindness of God, after all, we still die basically of natural causes. We didn’t blow our heads off.
August 3rd, 2007 at 7:25 pmIncidentally, the idea of lowering nicotine levels has nothing to do with decreasing smoking. It is the nicotine, not the tars or additives, that
smokers need. Lowering the nicotine means that smokers will need to smoke much more to restore nicotine balances. This means they will also be drawing in more of the harmful elements (tar, etc).
So why would government even propose this? Simple. Most of the cost of a pack of cigarets is taxes, which goes directly into general revenues, to be used however our legislators wish. This tax has nothing to do with health care.
August 12th, 2007 at 11:58 amWe’d make more progress on issues if we didn’t mix them.
Being pro or con smoking is one issue –
How harmful it is to those around the smoker is another –
Taxing one particular group because their vice is considered unacceptable by others – is another. That’s the main point of this issue.
We need to ask which group will be next ?
How about people that wear heavy fragrances in the office?
People that bring small children aboard airplanes?
SUV owners?
See what I mean? It’s a dangerous, not to mention, unfair method of raising money.
Maybe we need to see just what our fearless leaders, in all political parties, have been doing with the huge sums of money they take out of our checks already. If our infrastructure isn’t getting repaired…it takes an act of congress to fund our troops…no one is getting their health cared for…government is taking personal property away from citizens and giving it to private interests….
Well? Where’d it all go?
August 16th, 2007 at 1:45 pm