Posted on 03/29/2009 7:28:53 PM PDT by GSP.FAN
President Obama signed a law early in his administration to raise taxes from 39 cents to $1.01 per pack of cigarettes and from 19.5 cents to 50 cents per pound for chewing tobacco.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
First they came for the smokers. Next, no free exchange of body fluids because it "posses a risk to health". No fatty foods...and on and on.
We have a ship of fools here.
You are obviously a libtard, and I mean that in the most obnoxious way I can state it,you believe the government has the right to control anything if it is "for the children", you are no conservative, you are indeed on the wrong forum. We believe in liberty here, we believe in parents teaching their kids right from wrong, and controlling their behavior until they are old enough to decide for themselves. It is not up to the government to do this.
As for children starting to smoke in their teens, why yes, most smokers do start then, but then again most users of illegal drugs start at the same ages and drugs are completely and utterly outlawed.
Taxing cigs out of existence will not stop kids from smoking but most likely will have the same effect prohibition had on drinking, it will increase the use of tobacco, bought on the black market.
Time to take your meds.
You do know, don't you, that Adolf Hitler was the original anti-smoking Nazi?
In Nazi Germany, for instance, abstinence from tobacco was a "national socialist duty" (Hitler gave a gold watch to associates who quit the habit, though this didn't stop them lighting up in the Berlin bunker once they heard the Fuhrer had committed suicide). Armed with such senior sanction -- loyally, Reichsfuhrer Heinrich Himmler banned SS men from smoking, though not shooting, on duty, and Propaganda Minister Joseph Gobbels was obliged to hide his ciggie whenever he was filmed -- anti-tobacco activists succeeded in banning smoking from government offices, civic transport, university campuses, rest homes, post offices, many restaurants and bars, hospital grounds and workplaces. Tobacco taxes were raised, unsupervised cigarette vending machines were banned, and there were calls for a ban on smoking while driving.
Thanks to the Ministry of Science and Education, and the Reich Health Office, posters were produced depicting smoking as the typically despicable habit of Jews, jazz musicians, Gypsies, Indians, homosexuals, blacks, communists, capitalists, cripples, intellectuals and harlots. Zealous lobbyists descended into the schools, terrifying children with tales of impotence and racial impurity.
One particularly vile individual, Karl Astel -- upstanding president of Jena University, poisonous anti-Semite, euthanasia fanatic, SS officer, war criminal and tobacco-free Germany enthusiast -- liked to walk up to smokers and tear cigarettes from their unsuspecting mouths. (He committed suicide when the war ended, more through disappointment than fear of hanging.) It comes as little surprise to discover that the phrase "passive smoking" (Passivrauchen) was coined not by contemporary American admen, but by Fritz Lickint, the author of the magisterial 1100-page Tabak und Organismus ("Tobacco and the Organism"), which was produced in collaboration with the German AntiTobacco League.
If some of these measures appear familiar today, then consider the rules laid down in 1941 regarding tobacco advertising. "Images that create the impression that smoking is a sign of masculinity are barred, as are images depicting men engaged in activities attractive to youthful males (athletes or pilots, for example)," and "may not be directed at sportsmen or automobile drivers," while "advocates of tobacco abstinence or temperance must not be mocked." Advertisements were banned from films, billboards, posters and "the text sections of journals and newspapers." Nevertheless, even the Nazis couldn't equal the recent ban on smoking on death row, meaning prisoners about to undergo massive electric shocks are forbidden from indulging in "one last drag" -- talk about cruel and unusual punishment.
This great crusade, propagated through a remarkable network of lectures, re-education programs and congresses, was backed up by the medical and health establishment for the sake of "science." Or at least a certain type of junk science, one in which objective research and the scientific method was subordinated to, and bastardized for the sake of, a greater political program. Thus, it was commonly touted by scientists and racial hygienists that smoking caused "spontaneous abortions": a clearly demonstrable fallacy, but one requiring official promotion in order to ensure a high birth rate for Aryan women. (Source: Anti-tobacco Gestapo: past and present)
Im proud to be called a nazi by those who pimp death or are addicts.
So consevatives should support federal government control over our health choices? Exactly what is conservative about that?
Pretty soon it will be cheaper to smoke weed then tobacco.
Tobacco tax is a lie. Risk to smokers is vastly overstated and danger of second-hand smoke is non-existent. See Cato Damned Lies and Smoking (a paper written to demonstrate misuse of statistics) and Heartland Smokers’ Lounge.
Smokers support other people’s health costs. Smokers are heros. Say thank you to every smoker you meet — they are picking up your tab.
Exactly. So when gov't revenues fall drastically which creates a shortfall in funding for SCHIP, what will they do next?
The reality is 90% of all smokers started as teenagers.
Source, please.
Reducing teenage smoking is a valid goal and I support it.
Apparently, you forgot about the ban on tobacco advertising on television, ban on other advertising that appealed to teens such as Joe Camel, that smokers must be 18 to purchase tobacco and show an ID, and anti-tobacco programs in schools.
Every conservative should support a reduction in kids smoking.
Every conservative should denounce the hypocrisy of government placing exhorbant restrictions and taxes on a legal product whereas if that product is indeed bad for society it would be better to outlaw its sale then.
Sorry, teenage smoking is not a critical issue facing this nation.
But here on FR, smoking is celebrated and those who support teenagers are mocked as liberals.
We're adults, not teens here.
As long as tobacco is a legal product, you have no leg to stand on.
Correct, not anymore. The smoking wars are largely over. On April Fools day the price goes up, demand will drop below the current 20% (guessing that's about right)and thousands of teenagers won't become addicts. That's a good thing.
What do you think is going to happen when tobacco revenues fall short of SCHIP's funding?
and thousands of teenagers won't become addicts.
Riiiiight. They'll just start buying cigarettes off the black market and continue their addiction now that it'll be lucrative business. Why should they give an adult $10 bucks to buy some smokes for them when criminals hawking bootleg cigs will sell directly to them for cheaper and without them showing an ID? That's what happens when gov't tax and regulates a product out of the market. Econ 101, remember?
CVS in VA started early .. like 2 weeks ago. A state that’s economy was based on tabaccy.
Criminals sticking up convenience stores and gas stations are demanding the cigarettes, not the money. Then they resell it on the street. $20 bucks a carton is a helluva deal on some cigs. And they're going to target the teens too. Who knows, maybe they'll ask for sex in return. That's what happens when gov't enacts bad policies, after April Fools the unintended consequences will be a mutha for the people. Tobacco will be more lucrative than pot.
When the demand goes down and the government isn't getting the amount of taxes they expected, will the program go away? Of course not! They will find something else to tax to make up the difference. Perhaps next it will be your ox being gored.
“How do feel about children smoking?”
As I said, I don’t like smoking. Having seen my Dad die of lung cancer, I honestly can’t figure out why anyone would want to indulge in the stuff. Needless to say, I don’t approve of children smoking but that’s not a factor in this discussion, because it’s not legal for them to do so anyway.
Do not worry it will not be long before they starting taxing weed,especially here in CA.
Then they will tax it more,because of health issues associated with smoking weed,after that tax it more to fund causes to help people quit.
ping
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.