Posted on 01/20/2007 1:19:51 PM PST by sh0tgun willie
Jane Gravelle: After the Clinton administration proposed a fairly substantial increase in the cigarette tax as a way of funding health care reform, my colleague Dennis Zimmerman and I wrote a paper entitled "Cigarette Taxes to Fund Health Care Reform and Economic Analysis."* The part of the paper I'd like to talk about is the justifications for increasing the cigarette tax. I'm an economist, so I start with the presumptions that people have subjective preferences about what they like to do and how they spend their money and that, in general, we want to allow people to enjoy their lifetime resources in accord with those preferences. We would intervene in those decisions only under certain kinds of circumstances that we try to delineate and measure.
(Excerpt) Read more at cato.org ...
THIS has overcome smoking as the nation's number killer. Or are you just focused on smokers?
Health costs of obesity exceed smoking and drinking
Treating obesity-related disorders costs as much or more than illnesses caused by aging, smoking and problem drinking.
Obesity on track as No. 1 killer
Studies: Obesity Worse Than Tobacco Smoking
Study by RAND
"with worse physical health-related quality of life than are lifetime smoking, problem drinking or poverty."
Health & Science: Surgeon general warns obesity may overtake tobacco as leading preventable killer
Thanks for the great cartoon, Shelion.
on a more serious note, I don't know how old are the posters here, but I'm getting old and am appalled at what the younger generation doesn't know. I wonder how many know how many freedoms they've already lost without even firing a shot. Alas! I'm afraid it's as someone recently said, "too late to do anything about it, but too early to start shooting the ba$$tards."
There was a time when every twelve year old owned a gun and knew how to use it. Many of them even carried them to school and after school they put meat on the family table. There was a time when we didn't have cumbersome kiddie car seats and force babies to cry without end since their mother had to make them ride backward in the back seat and couldn't retrieve so much as a pacifier. We had METAL dashboards too and no seat belts, just a mother's strong arm. We wore what we had to school and there were no dress codes. We gave to our churches, and there was no welfare state. Cars weren't inspected since only fools would risk having one's vehicle fall in the road. Thirty-five miles an hour was fast enough, and slow enough to smell the flowers.
We didn't fill up the jails with DWI offenders either. The worse that could happen if one got drunk was fall off one's horse. LOL
If that is true, they don't have to be so damn nasty about it...........
Very true. But that does not imply that smoking bans were not a major factor in some of those failures. It all depends on the establishment's location, atmosphere, and clientele base before the ban, and the reaction of that clientele to the ban after it went into effect.
Nor does your statement mean that Big Brother should assume the power to dictate smoking policy to the restaurant or bar owners in general. Those decisions should be up to the property owners. It's part and parcel of the totality of property rights. Barring some compelling reason for government intervention, he who owns the property should determine how it is to be used. That's elemental to a free market economy.
I wouldn't mind seeing your list when you have time.
Thanks.
I feel like you do. A lot of snot nosed teen-agers have infiltrated our beloved Free Republic!
And you know what? The American motor vehicle fatality rate is 1/10 what it was in 1945, 1/5 of what it was in 1960, and 1/2 of what it was in 1990. Now remind again how terrible the American experiment with totalitarianism is...?
Years ago, there was a local bar/diner that had pool tables, dart boards, and a shuffle board. And, there was a smoking section. The place was next to being a dive, but fun. Believe it or not, non smokers complained that they couldn't sit at the bar because of the smoke. Whenever they came around us, we would light up two or three cigs to get rid of them. My son is a non smoker who owns a bar. So does my other half, who is also a non smoker. Both say they prefer smokers to non smokers, but here in Ohio, they are stuck with the stuffy complainers. They complain about more than just smoke.
There are a few subjects that do generate more contention around here than tobacco, but not too many.
I have a hard time with government intervention. Especially when the encroachment invades my personal space.
Unfortunately that is the arguement of the nanny-statis anti-smokers, and nanny staters in general, they consider anywhere they happen to be their personal space, even if they are on your or my property.
She Lion maintains the "Puff" list which primarily deals with issues relating to tobacco, I maintain the "Nanny-State" list which sometimes appears to only be about tobacco issues, but deals with other things as well in regard to the mentality of the nanny-state. Please let either of us know if you wish to be included on our lists.
Let me help out. You are a half wit fascist.
Well, at least you are doing something.
I still say if smokers could ever rouse themselves to become unified, they could stop all this nonsense.
Gays get rights and they are what? Supposedly 4 to 8 percent of the population (although sometimes it seems more like 90%)
The major minorities in this country raise a constant stink over everything and get accommodated.
Even the Muslims have everyone shaking in their boots.
And 20% of Americans smoke, but seem to have no inclination to take up for themselves. I don't get it.
Not a Nazi? Not a jack-booted thug? You can do better than that!
"What next?
Will smokers demand to be a class included in the Americans with Disabilities Act?"
Nanny staters are idiots who trample on others rights, if the Founding Fathers were alive today they'd overturn these "feel good" laws and spit in the nanny staters faces. I am amazed that there are nanny staters that call themselves conservatives, the nanny staters and conservatives are at opposite ends of the political spectrum. Nanny staters make laws based on feelings, true conservatives make laws based on rights.
The most prevalent cause of death (besides living way too long) is getting into an automobile.
Why don't you ply your wares on that if you are sincere.
I'm afraid you're right. One can always identify the younger generation. They think they're going to live forever, never having been told life is fatal. The rabid envirnonmentalist also worship NATURE. Wonder if they know that in the end NATURE is going to break them on the wheel?
Why waste time on a half wit?
Sorry, but that is incorrect. 400,000 Americans die from smoking each year. 40,000 die from motor vehicle accidents. When you consider that nearly 100% of the population enters cars, but only 20% smokes, the danger rate isn't even close!
I couldn't tell you. Why waste time on this thread or forum -- don't you have anything better to do?
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.