|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
 Posted - 04/06/2009 : 18:35:46 [Permalink]
|
Have you never been mentally stuck anywhere in your life, or has every area of your life made sense all the time since you were born? |
That wasn't meant to be a rhetorical question. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
 |
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 19:48:52 [Permalink]
|
How would you determine an appropriate tax on assuming credit for the good things in ones life and responsibility for those things that don't make sense? Recognizing the bad and figuring out how to correct the bad is sometimes difficult, but it is not impossible.
|
Not sure why we'd tax anything but large amounts of income and large amounts of property, but this isn't relevant to the question at hand. This is a regressive tax, and this is not the time for regressive taxes. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2009 : 21:16:15 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by chaloobi
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by chaloobi
Somebody please list the benefits of smoking. |
1) All the cool kids are doing it.
2) Self-medication for low alertness, high anxiety and possibly some inflammatory diseases.
3) Maintaining employment levels within the tobacco industry during these hard economic times.
4) Donating about 3.5 cents per cigarette to SCHIP. |
I was referring to personal benefits - why would you choose to get hooked sort of thing. |
And it looked like most of the discussion was about a regressive tax on those who already smoke. Reasons for starting to smoke are different from the reasons for continuing to smoke.| And 1) is the only personal benefit so far as I can tell and that wears off after highschool. |
If self-medication isn't a personal benefit, then over-the-counter aspirin (for just one example) has no benefits at all unless your doctor tells you to take it.
Reasons 1 and 3 were mostly tongue-in-cheek. 3 is definitely a personal benefit for those within the tobacco industry.
4 could actually make some smokers feel better about not quitting in the face of higher cigarette taxes.
I didn't start smoking until after highschool. Don't ask me why, I don't remember. And I smoked about three cigarettes per day for the first year or so. And I only smoked super-expensive imports to help ensure that wouldn't smoke a lot, and for a while I had a rather large disgust of cheap American smokes. Apparently, it wore off. Might have had something to do with being able to buy beer (Virginia's smoking age was 16 at the time, while I had to wait until 19 to buy beer, go figure). |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
chaloobi
SFN Regular
1620 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2009 : 04:42:20 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by chaloobi
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by chaloobi
Somebody please list the benefits of smoking. |
1) All the cool kids are doing it.
2) Self-medication for low alertness, high anxiety and possibly some inflammatory diseases.
3) Maintaining employment levels within the tobacco industry during these hard economic times.
4) Donating about 3.5 cents per cigarette to SCHIP. |
I was referring to personal benefits - why would you choose to get hooked sort of thing. |
And it looked like most of the discussion was about a regressive tax on those who already smoke. Reasons for starting to smoke are different from the reasons for continuing to smoke.| And 1) is the only personal benefit so far as I can tell and that wears off after highschool. |
If self-medication isn't a personal benefit, then over-the-counter aspirin (for just one example) has no benefits at all unless your doctor tells you to take it.
Reasons 1 and 3 were mostly tongue-in-cheek. 3 is definitely a personal benefit for those within the tobacco industry.
4 could actually make some smokers feel better about not quitting in the face of higher cigarette taxes.
I didn't start smoking until after highschool. Don't ask me why, I don't remember. And I smoked about three cigarettes per day for the first year or so. And I only smoked super-expensive imports to help ensure that wouldn't smoke a lot, and for a while I had a rather large disgust of cheap American smokes. Apparently, it wore off. Might have had something to do with being able to buy beer (Virginia's smoking age was 16 at the time, while I had to wait until 19 to buy beer, go figure).
|
To start smoking it has to be either wanting to look cool or being pressured by the group in some way, either overtly or just picking it up because all your friends are doing it... Why would anyone start smoking otherwise? It's not like your first drag tastes good or you love the smell of smoke the first time around.
To continue smoking? Self-medication for relaxation might play a small role, but I can't imagine its anywhere near as significant as the behovioral habit and strong addiction. |
-Chaloobi
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2009 : 05:38:39 [Permalink]
|
Cigarettes were about $0.30 a pack when I started smoking. What are they now, about ten times as much? What is that, adjusting for inflation (from the late 1960's), do you suppose? Is this world rid of cigarette smoking? Do people mainly quit because of price, or do they mainly quit because of information?
Edited:
According to http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl $.30 in 1968 is now $1.83. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 04/07/2009 05:39:18 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2009 : 05:43:22 [Permalink]
|
To start smoking it has to be either wanting to look cool or being pressured by the group in some way, either overtly or just picking it up because all your friends are doing it... Why would anyone start smoking otherwise? It's not like your first drag tastes good or you love the smell of smoke the first time around.
To continue smoking? Self-medication for relaxation might play a small role, but I can't imagine its anywhere near as significant as the behovioral habit and strong addiction.
|
I don't think wanting to cultivate an image is limited to 13-year-olds.
Also, people think it helps them relax or think better, whether it does or not.
People think it's impossible to quit. It's not easy. I did it enough to know. Haven't smoked since 1987, and I still think about it once in a while.
To me, taxing smoking is like taxing mental illness. Doesn't make a lot of sense, but I haven't seen the data. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 04/07/2009 05:44:19 |
|
|
|
Jan
New Member
USA
5 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2009 : 07:50:31 [Permalink]
|
| Isn't it legal to grow your own tobacco plants? I see that 500 seeds are selling for 1.99 on e-bay. Or can I use the argument that tobacco is a religious sacramental plant, like peyote to the Indians and shouldn't be any of the governments business? |
|
|
|
chaloobi
SFN Regular
1620 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2009 : 08:13:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
I don't think wanting to cultivate an image is limited to 13-year-olds. |
Neither do I, nor did I say or imply so.
| Also, people think it helps them relax or think better, whether it does or not. |
It certainly does for anyone who's addicted to nicotine. Do non-addicts smoke to relax???
| People think it's impossible to quit. It's not easy. I did it enough to know. Haven't smoked since 1987, and I still think about it once in a while. |
I know a LOT of people who smoked and quit. In my immediate family: my mother, 2 brothers, 1 sister, 2 brothers-in-law and 1 father-in-law. Some quit fairly easily and several had an extremely hard time. It depends on the individual apparently.
| To me, taxing smoking is like taxing mental illness. |
I agree it's a lot like that. And if we accept that analogy, then we have a legal and widely available product that causes mental illness to people who use it. That's absurd. And to use taxation as the primary means to address the use of this product is even more absurd. And the icing on the cake is using the resulting revenue to pay for poor children's health care. WTF?  |
-Chaloobi
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2009 : 09:16:45 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by chaloobi
To continue smoking? Self-medication for relaxation might play a small role, but I can't imagine its anywhere near as significant as the behovioral habit and strong addiction. |
You asked for the benefits of smoking. I wasn't addressing those benefits' significance related to other factors.
Oh, I forgot one:
5) Being forced together into designated public smoking areas by anti-smoking laws, smokers meet people they would never have otherwise met. In other words, outside the tobacco industry, smoking isn't correlated with occupation or class, and so cramming smokers into tiny places to smoke ensures mixing of disparate people, and thus a larger diversity of experience.
And another:
6) Habitually carrying a lighter occasionally comes in handy for non-smoking purposes, like lighting candles, campfires, shrinking heat-shrink or destroying photos of ex-girlfriends. Sure, one need not carry a lighter to do these things (and more), but it can save a lot of time.| Do non-addicts smoke to relax??? |
I know plenty of people who only smoke when they drink, or only when playing golf, or only while fishing. I've got an aunt who treats cigarettes like she treats alcohol: she doesn't smoke before about 5 PM, and finds it shocking that anyone would. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2009 : 09:51:19 [Permalink]
|
| Right. Everyone who takes drugs are not addicts, everyone who drinks are not alcoholics. Does that make it a luxury? Fine. Does it make sense to tax these things? I don't think so, but if it does, that's fine. Just not now. Tax the people who benefit from the system in order to pay for the system. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
chaloobi
SFN Regular
1620 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2009 : 11:20:22 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Oh, I forgot one:
5) Being forced together into designated public smoking areas by anti-smoking laws, smokers meet people they would never have otherwise met. In other words, outside the tobacco industry, smoking isn't correlated with occupation or class, and so cramming smokers into tiny places to smoke ensures mixing of disparate people, and thus a larger diversity of experience.
|
It's funny you should mention this as I've insisted for many years that smokers were nicer people than non-smokers. My rationale was that smokers are grouped together in enclosed areas (outside these days) with nothing to do but make small talk while they get their fix. They also become accustomed to asking for and loaning cigarettes to each other and providing lights, and what not. Smoking forces them to practice being social in ways and with a frequency that non-smokers don't experience. The effect is they are more social, or in the vernacular, are "nicer" people.
I reached this conclusion in my first semester away at college. The first guy I befriended was a smoker and I ended up hanging around in the designated smoking area and making friends with all the smokers. I never picked the addiction up myself but nearly everyone I was friends with in college was a smoker. |
-Chaloobi
|
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2009 : 14:08:13 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
Right. Everyone who takes drugs are not addicts, everyone who drinks are not alcoholics. Does that make it a luxury? Fine. Does it make sense to tax these things? I don't think so, but if it does, that's fine. Just not now. Tax the people who benefit from the system in order to pay for the system.
|
Sure, but doing that rigorously might just make you end up with regressive taxation. People of lower social economic status often make more use of health care programs, are less likely to have health care insurance and thus more likely to have to make use of programs like medicaid, are more likely to have to use social security programs, etc etc. I have yet to see any evidence that the richest people are also the people that are most likely to make use of or benefit from state programs. You see this in countries where there is a less stringent taxation and social welfare scheme, it's not the rich that suffer most.
Now, I live in the Netherlands so the situation is a bit different here. At present I make a bit less than modal income but I'll make a lot more in 5 to 10 years. I'll happily pay the taxes I do now for the wellfare state we have, even though I know I will probably be a net payer. I think it is fair that the stronger carry a higher burden. I'm in favor of progressive taxation.
But I don't see why I should have any concern if luxury goods are taxed more heavily. You can't pay them, well, life's a bitch. I don't have many luxury goods, I don't see the need for them. I don't smoke, I only drink now and then, I have a television for the first time in ten years because I got mine from my sister, same for my DVD-player, stereo and I make my own furniture. I can live without those things, so you can too. You can't pay a television because of taxes, go take a walk in the park. Or get out and talk to your neighbors for a change. You can't pay your smokes, tough luck. You'll feel better in a week.
I really don't see why I should have any pity for anyone who cannot afford luxury goods. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2009 : 18:50:06 [Permalink]
|
Sure, but doing that rigorously might just make you end up with regressive taxation. People of lower social economic status often make more use of health care programs, are less likely to have health care insurance and thus more likely to have to make use of programs like medicaid, are more likely to have to use social security programs, etc etc. I have yet to see any evidence that the richest people are also the people that are most likely to make use of or benefit from state programs. You see this in countries where there is a less stringent taxation and social welfare scheme, it's not the rich that suffer most.
|
People who need the paltry government programs that supposedly benefit the poor in the U.S., are those who benefit least from the system. The system has left them out. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2009 : 06:35:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
People who need the paltry government programs that supposedly benefit the poor in the U.S., are those who benefit least from the system. The system has left them out.
|
Which system has left them out? Regardless of how paltry the governmental aid is for them, they would probably be much worse of without it. It's the difference between being able to pay for food and certain medical services, however scarce, and getting access to those.
What is the benefit for someone who is rich? History shows that protection, health and opportunity can all be bought. Whereas for the working class, these things have often only been gained through governmental programs, either by legally enforcing worker protections or by putting in place government programs that support those who do not have jobs or suffer from chronic diseases. These people often pay the least amount of taxes, both in amount and in percentage. Yet these people are also the ones that need these programs the most.
|
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2009 : 07:54:36 [Permalink]
|
I'm not sure what you're asking. What system do the people of the United States, even the world, live in?
It is a system built to benefit the wealthy. There were some minor programs to make sure that most of us don't starve to avoid riots. The last few months have shown that the economy of the U.S. is a fraud that benefits only a few percent at the top at the expense of the rest of us.
Sorry, but I'm confused by your answer. The U.S. is not the Netherlands. We do not have a system which makes sure the least of us have the basics. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Reminds me of Bush 41
