Replies

The reason that well-intentioned officials keep trying such policies is because they may either not understand the adverse consequences, don’t care about them, or have a view of the role of government that is not consistent with the limited one envisioned by America’s Founding Fathers, and ALEC.

That's about as good an explanation as I have seen. The huge tax increases on such a politically incorrect item as cigarettes may seem a safe bet for politicians who don't have the political will to cut spending, but I'll just bet it's going to cost the current mayor of New York City another term. And after Gov. Pataki's deal with the NYC health care worker's union, in which a relatively small number of union members were going to get huge raises paid for by cigarette tax revenues that have yet to materialize, is about to crash and burn, it's a good thing he's not planning to run for another term.

It'll be interesting to see how Pataki will fulfill his promises. I'd bet my bottom dollar that something else will be taxed-something people can't do without and can't produce for themselves or can't obtain from an Indian reservation or another state- so that Pataki can give the union it's big salary increase.

BUMP!

I applaud this speaker for his willingness to address an unpopular (to the PC crowd) topic. If the State(s) think smokers will roll over and pay these punitive taxes on a legal commodity without seeking cheaper alternatives...then they must be smoking something illegal!

I bet anything that the anti smoking zealots and the cash whores of the various organized crime governments will take what money they can and screw draining the financial swamp for the terrorists. In other words, for the government if it means a choice between losing the tax and the terrorists, the government will keep the tax. Anyways, having a few terrorist around is good for government growth. Government loves the INTENDED consequences of it’s actions. This creates yet more need for more government, taxes, government jobs, ets.

"Here's the list of what the U.S. Justice Department claims Harb purchased and sent to Hezbollah with his cigarette smuggling profits: night-vision goggles, cameras and scopes, surveying equipment, global positioning systems,mine and metal detection equipment, video equipment, advanced aircraft analysis and design software, laptop computers, stun guns, radios, mining, drilling equipment, radars, ultrasonic dog repellent, laser range finders and blasting equipment. And this is not just one isolated incident of illicit cigarette sales being used to fund terror networks."

Another sterling example of how government policies protect the health, safety, and welfare of the people. However, I would argue that this is not an example of the law of unintended consequences. The government knows full well that as they increase cigarette taxes illicit markets will open up to serve the demand thereby giving the government an opportunity to expand their power by passing more laws to correct this problem, and of course erode individual rights, an added benefit for the government if you will.

For a detailed discussion on how this methodology works see any WOD article.

The South Dakota Legislature is considering raising taxes on cigarettes by $1 per pack. One almost certain consequence will be that smokers will then look to the local Indian Reservations for their smokes.

The economist Arthur Laffer also described this effect in the so called "Laffer Curve" -- raising tax rates beyond a certain point will decrease not increase tax revenue. Given high taxes people will seek other alternatives.