Posted on 07/01/2002 5:25:58 AM PDT by areafiftyone
(New York-AP) -- It's costly to be a smoker in New York City now.
Beginning today, cigarette smokers in the city will pay more than seven dollars a pack for many major brands. The Bloomberg administration's new tax on cigarettes is expected to raise an additional 111 (M) million dollars of revenue this year.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg says the tax will prevent 50-thousand deaths -- including over 33-thousand premature deaths among city children.
The law raises the city tax on cigarettes from eight cents a pack to one dollar and 50 cents a pack.
Smokers in New York City will now pay more than double the national average for cigarettes.
Critics of the new tax say consumers could avoid the taxes by buying cigarettes over the Internet, in nearby states or from Indian reservations and from the underground market.
The mayor spent months negotiating with the City Council over how to close a five (B) billion dollar budget gap.
Besides the new cigarette tax, new fees were approved for cell phones and parking tickets for the budget year -- which begins today.<
Yes and that is probably 75 percent of the problem with her circulation. She started smoking at 13 though and smoking is also hard on circulation.
I understand your 'hatred' of smoking, but I find it appalling that they tax cigarettes as they do, yet barely touch liquor and leave porn totally unscathed. Perhaps those two 'sins' are the politicians favorites.
I think you might be right. I'm not a teatotalitarian Baptist type and this sin tax is obviously one small step short of prohibition. I wonder if there is a beer lobby and a porn lobby that is much stronger than the tobacco lobby. Drinking in moderation is actually not bad for your body and may even have a lot of benefits.
Porn is a whole different story. It is obviously prostitution which is also only illegal in the books but not in practice.
What about all of the times your mother-in-law took care of your wife when she was sick when she was growing up? What about all of the places she carted her to?
If you 'talk' this way about your mother-in-law in front of your children, I wouldn't doubt if they feel the same way about you when you are elderly and sick. I feel sorry for you.
If she had to pick up my wife at the slammer for teen drunkenness she might be justified in supporting more nanny rules about drinking then mightn't she?
Ever read what the bible says about rage?
No, it would not be legal. However, unless you're standing in the middle of Times Square with an entire truckload of cigarettes and a megaphone hawking them for $10 a carton, the cops aren't going to care. Hell, they'd probably buy from you themselves if they smoke. Just don't call attention to yourself.
Hey, lesser of two evils. If Green has won, the new tax would probably be three times as high, and he'd be working on trying to ban cars within city limits or something. Green's a true ultra-lefty. I'll take Bloomie.
It is impossible to definitively place blame on cigarette smoking for any individual person's diseases. IMPOSSIBLE. You can suspect. You can highly suspect, even. But you can never ever prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. She could have been genetically susceptible to circulation problems. It could have been entirely related to poor dietary habits. She could be one of those few unlucky people that got hit with fallout from all those above-ground nuke tests in the 50s and 60s. It could be anything.
Oh, and it's been proven that merely eating junk food is not the source of poor health in overweight people: It's being sedentary. You could be quite fat, but as long as you maintain just about any level of exercise whatsoever, even just a half-hour walk per day, then you're going to be in much better overall health than a thin person who eats absolutely "perfectly" but gets no exercise at all.
That's exactly right, I don't know how they keep a straight face when they say that. They say they want people to quit, but I doubt it, not when they see the revenues generated.
The tobacco companies have raised prices since the tobacco settlements with various states. Ultimately, that money is going into tort lawyers pockets and filling their coffers so they can go after "junk food" and alcohol. http://www.smokes-spirits.com
Only in the philosphical sense that you can not prove that yesterday existed, IMPOSSIBLE!
Oh, and it's been proven that merely eating junk food is not the source of poor health in overweight people: It's being sedentary. You could be quite fat, but as long as you maintain just about any level of exercise whatsoever, even just a half-hour walk per day, then you're going to be in much better overall health than a thin person who eats absolutely "perfectly" but gets no exercise at all.
I'm a fittness nut and I agree 100 percent. I love biking to work and lifting weights.
There are already laws concerning "teen drunkenness" -- it's against the law for them to drink at all, as you know, so your analogy doesn't fit.
Ever read what the bible says about rage?
I'm not sure...maybe. Ever read what the Bible says about 'wonking'? Hehehe
When I was pregnant with my first child, I quit smoking and would not smoke anywhere around him....he has asthma. When I was pregnant with my twins, the doctor said to just cut down on smoking, but don't quit because the stress would be bad for the babies and I could lose them....they don't have asthma. Go figure.
|
This state is elevating, as the hurt turns into hating Anticipating all the f*cked up feelings again
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.