Obama's First Tax Hike

Dungheap said:
The taxes aren't really designed to get people to stop necessarily. They seem more designed to keep people from starting.

Here's how I see it:

(1) Providing children with health insurance is a good thing but it costs money.

(2) Disincetivizing smoking is a good thing. Taxes are a good way to disincentivize smoking.

Using the taxes generated by (2) to pay for (1) makes perfect sense. Of course, relying of cigarette taxes into perpetuity isn't going to work, but for the present it will.
Click to expand...

If the tax is successfull it will result in the lack of need for the tax, and in the long run if smoking is reduced signifigantly the result will be in a net profit for the Government/the American people.
 
I just cant agree with this issue. If your gonna tax the shit out of cigs then put the money into smoking related health issues research or treatment.
 
to pretend Obama is not hiking taxes on poor people is juvenille by democrats.
Just man/woman up and say "hey fuckwad what president keeps all there promises".
 
Topspin said:
to pretend Obama is not hiking taxes on poor people is juvenille by democrats.
Just man/woman up and say "hey fuckwad what president keeps all there promises".
Click to expand...

Where has he increased taxes on poor people?
 
Chapdog said:
I just dont like the idea of it. Creates a situation where the is no incentive to get people to stop smoking which is a far greater strain on our health care system.
Click to expand...


Its practical.

If you are going to cost us extra money by deciding to smoke we cant control that but we sure as hell make you help us protect the next generation.
 
Poor mother in MA addicted to smokes paying $7.50 for a pack versus the 1.50 they were a few years ago takes kids to McDonalds for cheap dinner versus buying more expensive healthy food.

Edit: Make that $8.50 with the federal tax increase.
 
Chapdog said:
Poor mother in MA addicted to smokes paying $7.50 for a pack versus the 1.50 they were a few years ago takes kids to McDonalds for cheap dinner versus buying more expensive healthy food.

Edit: Make that $8.50 with the federal tax increase.
Click to expand...

Mother ought to cook real food for her chillun.
Much cheaper than McDogals.

And we should tax alcoholic beverages more too.
 
It depends on what you mean by "healthy".

If you believe that pesticides are in no way healthy, and eat organic, than yeah, it costs a lot more. You should see my grocery bill for two people. You wouldn't believe it, and I don't even want to say it, because I'll be made fun of.

I'll just give one example. I love pink grapefruit. I eat one almost every mid-morning. I don't want to eat it with pesticides. The organic pink grapefruits cost 2.50 each. My bf loves them too. That's 5 bucks a day just on grapefruits.
 
Chapdog said:
I bet it costs more then fast food to make a healthy meal.
Click to expand...

Nope and you can eat home prepared not so healthy meals cheaper than that.
Chicken noodle soup .35 per serving. Crackers about .25. glass of milk maybe .35.
Grilled cheese sandwitch maybe .30.

We are talking lunch now aren't we?
Or is mcdonalds a main meal place for you?
 
Last edited:
SmarterThanYou said:
why?
Click to expand...

To my notion a tax should affect consumers mostly (another reason I liked Huckabee), with maybe an exemption for groceries and in some cases, automobiles. If something igested (not food) is known to be harmful but not necessary then tax it heavily. Tobacco, Alcohol, any drugs that eventually get legalized, etc. all fall into this category for me. Tax them heavily and then use the money to do some good.....which is another area of concern for me. The government has shown itself not to be the best stewards of our tax dollars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top