Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Smokers - common sense questions
FOX | 2002 | several

Posted on 08/10/2002 2:29:58 PM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 last
To: jdontom
Why can't smokers form a Tobacco Union, Don't their votes count or is it smokers can't vote? I'm sure if they united with lets say 15% or 20% of the vote they would no longer be pushed around. Then and only then would the politicos listen to them...

The type of response I have been waiting for.

There are some key elements which make this very interesting. First, the majority of smokers are liberals. Second, (as mentioned previously to some extent) corporate sales have been damaged as a result of government's intervention on their rights. Third, investor losses have been the consequence.

My point is that there could be a much larger segment than simply smokers, how many investors are non-smokers? And how many of the investors won't be conservatives? Interesting?

81 posted on 08/11/2002 7:56:22 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: mrfixit514
1..... Not all smokers die a horrorfying death, non-smokers are almost as to.

2..... the smokers are paying enough taxes to pay their own and most others medical bills.

3.... When will non-smokers think of someone other than themselves.

4.... Smokers do not pollute anymore than anyone else, as tobacco smoke is far from being the only pollutant in the air we breathe.

Now go back and play nice in your sandbox.

82 posted on 08/11/2002 8:12:10 AM PDT by Great Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Dec31,1999
#55...... One in three people will get one cancer or another in their lifetime.......... cancer isn't picky about whom it attacks.
83 posted on 08/11/2002 8:27:04 AM PDT by Great Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Great Dane
People paying full price when there are alternatives, are suckers

Well, I agree with you--sort of.

(Warning--Economics 1 lecture coming...)

Marginal utility will determine what each of us will do in this case.

The higher the tax the more time, effort etc. is justified to circumvent it assuming it is a legal activity. If it is an illegal activity a "risk factor" will be weighed by the consumer as they weigh whether circumvention is appropriate.

Since there are easy legal alternatives and high taxes in many states circumvention is a rational decision for most people.

People who continue to pay the taxes may do so because they are unaware of good alternatives (and every newspaper aticle or other media story reduces the likelihood of that) or too busy or rich to care. Suckers? Well, only some of them. To truly be a "sucker" they would have to know about the alternatives, have the time or other resources necessary to pursue it, and then choose to pay the higher tax.
84 posted on 08/11/2002 8:39:20 AM PDT by cgbg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Why can't smokers form a Tobacco Union, Don't their votes count or is it smokers can't vote? I'm sure if they united with lets say 15% or 20% of the vote they would no longer be pushed around. Then and only then would the politicos listen to them...

Listen: Unions are useless today. GM in Michigan went totally smoke free the 5th of this month! Where was the UNION then?!

SAPPI paper mills went completely smoke free in July! Where were THEIR UNIONS??!!

Can't even smoke in your vehicle on their lots. Where were the UNIONS to let this happen?!

I believe in a business to do what they want with their own property, but when they stick it to their smoking employees who have worked for their companys years and years, where is the justice? They should have grandfathered this, and still provided a place for their smoking employees.

Even if it's outside. But oh no! Wall-to-wall smoke bans! These corporations got into the pocket of SOMEBODY , you can believe it!

85 posted on 08/11/2002 8:50:10 AM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: ninenot
Sorry to have mis-read your post.

Hey, no biggie, comprehension is half the writer's problem as well- I knew when I put that "corporations run the country" down that it was open for attack in a way.

I just meant that corporations first and foremost provide jobs- that's political weapon number one. But they also make this country. They build the infrastructure, the products we rely upon and the services we use. They have to contribute loads of money to the Congress to have a voice there (the theory being to help prevent anti business laws from being created- in practice it's simple bribery) and they control the media apparatus and the means of defense production. All that equates pretty much to running things.

If the heads of Microsoft, Intel, GE, AT&T, Coca Cola etc ever got together and got on the same sheet of music and said "We're going to do something about this or that" it would get done. If they decided to change the law in this country, that would get done as well. The politicians rely on corporate donations- they think it doesn't matter once they are in the Big House, then they have "Power" (said in a low hiss). But they won't get very far as long as the corporations have a vice grip on their collective scrotums, and I think that's a good thing. It will never be in the interest of Big Business in the end to become socialist or communist. They provide a powerful counter balance against the leftward push in the Congress. I just wish they would do more.

On a side note, here's my problem- I'm long winded. I have to rattle on for a few paragraphs and dance around what I want to say- you cut to the chase in one line by conjuring up an image most Americans can readily identify with- The Boston Tea Party. That is, in a nutshell, what I wanted to say. Cheers.

86 posted on 08/11/2002 8:56:00 AM PDT by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Richard Kimball
The best way in the world to die still sucks.

the death rate has stayed fairly constant at one per person

Bravo, good stuff.

87 posted on 08/11/2002 9:03:06 AM PDT by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
5- How does targeting a specific group square with "equal protection under the law"?

6- How does it avoid the assertion that it is "arbitrary and capricous" if the alternative, making tobacco an illegal substance is available any time?

88 posted on 08/11/2002 9:10:40 AM PDT by Publius6961
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cgbg
To truly be a "sucker" they would have to know about the alternatives, have the time or other resources necessary to pursue it, and then choose to pay the higher tax.

You're right. :-}

89 posted on 08/11/2002 9:24:45 AM PDT by Great Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: mrfixit514
1) How will you explain to your family that they must bear the torture of seeing you die a painful death that could have been avoided?
When was the last time you asked a skydiver or rockclimber or a skier that?

2) Why should the government pay medical expenses (which comes from taxpayers) to treat a disease you could have avoided?
I never asked them them to.
And they "volunteered" to precisely to make that asinine assertion.

3) When will smokers think about someone other than themselves?
Do gooders do it all the time. What's the difference?

4) Why do smokers think they have the right to pollute the air that non-smokers breathe?
They don't.
"second hand" smoke has been proven a fraud over and over and over.
And the foaming anti-smokers' position not to allow or even consider "smoking only" restaurants defines their true controlling twit nature.

These are the questions smokers should be asking themselves. But they are too wrapped up in their own desires. Smoking is foolish and selfish.
Lots of things are foolish and selfish, including needless anti-smoking diatribes.

90 posted on 08/11/2002 9:27:24 AM PDT by Publius6961
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
The tax on cigarettes here in Ohio was raised to 55 cents per pack. Governor Taft has pissed off a huge segment of the population since Ohio has a higher than average rate of smokers, and they are reminded everytime they go to the store. I believe the demographics for Ohio and Kentucky are something like 35% smokers as opposed to 25% nation wide.

Still a person can buy cigarettes here and make a handsome profit selling them in places like New York. It is just like probition. I live close to the Kentucky border and travel there one or two days a week. The tax there is 3 cents a pack. That's where I intend to do my grocery shopping from now on, and the Ohio retailers lose out on cigarette sales and groceries. Some people are making money buying cigarettes in bulk and comming to Ohio to sell them for thousands of dollars in profit. Already there has been one case where terrorist fund raisers were black marketing cigarettes across state lines to fund Al Queda.

The politics of cigarette tax will have little or no effect on the rate of smoking and the additional revenue raised by state governments will evaporate once they find out what it costs to enforce the law. Thanks Bob Taft for signing a piece of legislation that was just plain stupid.

91 posted on 08/11/2002 9:32:53 AM PDT by SSN558
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kozak
Search and find SBE Seeds, an absolutely wonderful resource for which I've momentarily misplaced the URL. Everything from books and videos and seeds of all types of tobacco to plans for building your own drying kiln.
92 posted on 08/11/2002 10:47:51 AM PDT by Max McGarrity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Prodigal Son
THanks for the explanation. However--there's a point you left open for discussion: you postulate that the Corps are 'the only thing which can stanch the leftward drift of Congress.'

Not really.

If the leftward drift is in the interests of the Corps, they will push hard to the left. See the steel tariffs as an example.

Back to the hard stuff. A good part of Big Steel's problem is that they are competing with slave labor in the Far East--not only are the wages small, but healthcare and pension costs are zip a dee doo dah.

So when tariffs are applied, is the Gummint doing the right thing (supporting OUR guys) or the wrong thing (raising the price of basic steel--by about 25%)???

Hmmmmm?
93 posted on 08/11/2002 2:39:00 PM PDT by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-93 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson