Federal Exise Tax on Cigerettes and Cigars

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Wreckem
I felt this deserved its own thread.

Tucked inside the SCHIP Bill is this little, extremely regressive tax, on cigerettes. As passed by the House, the bill would increase the federal excise tax on cigerettes by $.45 and increase the taxes on cigars by 200%.

This is an extremely regressive tax, that will HURT the poor, who are vast majority of those who smoke. Some places in the country will be over $9 a pack as a result. Cigerettes are already the MOST taxed item in the country, when is enough, enough?

And no I don't smoke, but this type of tax is going to hurt the "working poor" as Dave likes to call them, more than anyone else. Its also highly discriminatory and IMHO just a bad idea offered up by the democrats.

It seems the the democrats have a penchent for adding tax increases to unrelated bills as of late(the farm bill and schip bills both have tax increases tucked away in them). For those who don't know the democrats managed to get a tax increase on foriegn companies operating and employing americans in the United States. And people say we have a problem with unempolyment, obviously the Democrats dont think so since they decided to increase the tax on foreign companies employing americans in the United States.

This is going to help the poor actually. These people will buy less cigarettes, and smoke less, therefore decrease their chances of acquiring lung cancer and heart disease later in life.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Wreckem
I felt this deserved its own thread.

Tucked inside the SCHIP Bill is this little, extremely regressive tax, on cigerettes. As passed by the House, the bill would increase the federal excise tax on cigerettes by $.45 and increase the taxes on cigars by 200%.

This is an extremely regressive tax, that will HURT the poor, who are vast majority of those who smoke. Some places in the country will be over $9 a pack as a result. Cigerettes are already the MOST taxed item in the country, when is enough, enough?

And no I don't smoke, but this type of tax is going to hurt the "working poor" as Dave likes to call them, more than anyone else. Its also highly discriminatory and IMHO just a bad idea offered up by the democrats.

It seems the the democrats have a penchent for adding tax increases to unrelated bills as of late(the farm bill and schip bills both have tax increases tucked away in them). For those who don't know the democrats managed to get a tax increase on foriegn companies operating and employing americans in the United States. And people say we have a problem with unempolyment, obviously the Democrats dont think so since they decided to increase the tax on foreign companies employing americans in the United States.

This is going to help the poor actually. These people will buy less cigarettes, and smoke less, therefore decrease their chances of acquiring lung cancer and heart disease later in life.

Yeah, not likely.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: PingSpike

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Everybody has a habit, or affinity toward something. Some people enjoy a smoke, some enjoy a candy bar, some enjoy a drink, and some enjoy a beautiful hooker. Tax them all, or tax none of them.

Very discriminatory bullshit, IMO.

The the health arguements are very valid, but only when the US is paying for all my medical insurance and hospitalization costs, would I support these lame taxes. :|

Don't poor people get some kind of state/government sponsered health care through medicare or something?

Only children, invalids, the disabled, and the elderly. Most of the poor do not, why do you think some dems are calling for universial healthcare.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Hacp
This is going to help the poor actually. These people will buy less cigarettes, and smoke less, therefore decrease their chances of acquiring lung cancer and heart disease later in life.

How do you make these kind of statements and still fancy yourself a liberal?

 

[Tab]

Guys, it's perfectly fine to buy cigarettes but...

IF YOU SMOKE THEM YOU'RE WORSE THAN HITLER, MAO, BUSH, BARNIE!

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Good. Maybe they'll quit and not use public money for as much health related problems.

problem with that. tax means money to the government to spend. if you raise the tax high enough where people start to quit or it creates a blackmarket and it will that tax money the government is just as addicted to will look in other areas to keep that money coming in.

Yes, as I understand it, increasing taxes on cigarettes doesn't result in increased gov revenues..

And yes, black market cigarettes are already a problem. Over here in NC they busted a big ring of cigarette smuglers who were Al Qaeda.

Funny how the Dems with their oh-so weak majority CAN manage to push through *nanny taxes* and other crap, but just CAN'T seem to stop the war in Iraq because of those naughty Repubs in Congress.

When it suits them, they don't seem to mind a veto threat either.

Fern

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Hacp
This is going to help the poor actually. These people will buy less cigarettes, and smoke less, therefore decrease their chances of acquiring lung cancer and heart disease later in life.

How do you make these kind of statements and still fancy yourself a liberal?

He is a compassionate Liberal.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Shivetya
The government needs to ban cigarettes.

Nothing like freedom, eh comrade?

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I wasn't aware of candy causing cancer.

No, but if you eat $9 worth of a candy a day you're going to end up with diabetes and heart disease.

Got any more bright comments, moron?

Of course I do. You should know better.

You honestly believe that if cigarettes were invented now that the FDA would allow them to be unleashed on the general public???

Are you going to answer the question Bober?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Hacp
This is going to help the poor actually. These people will buy less cigarettes, and smoke less, therefore decrease their chances of acquiring lung cancer and heart disease later in life.

How do you make these kind of statements and still fancy yourself a liberal?

He is a compassionate Liberal.

Sounds to me like he's just as "compassionate" as the Drug Warrior conservatives. What's next? Bring back alcohol prohibition?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Hacp
This is going to help the poor actually. These people will buy less cigarettes, and smoke less, therefore decrease their chances of acquiring lung cancer and heart disease later in life.

How do you make these kind of statements and still fancy yourself a liberal?

He is a compassionate Liberal.

Sounds to me like he's just as "compassionate" as the Drug Warrior conservatives.

What's next? Bring back alcohol prohibition?

You're just as off base as you're buddy Bober.

Does alcohol cause cancer?

 

[palehorse]

The irony is that the tax revenue required to fund the SCHIP would itself require roughly 24 million new smokers to do so.

So essentially we have a healthcare bill that encourages smoking! lol... ya gotta love the tax-happy Dems and their wunderbar healthcare strategies!

bah..

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Shivetya
The government needs to ban cigarettes.

I 100% agree with this. I guess that makes me a stupid, comrade, moron (Nice trifecta up there BoberFett, well played).

You are batshit insane for suggesting this and so is Hillary and anyone else. This is absolutely 100% anti freedom and anti American. Hillary is totally off the radar for me for even bringing this up, worst idea evar.

Anyone who supports this should be wearing a brown shirt and goose stepping and I'm not exaggerating.

All this would do is creaqte another opportunity for criminals to thrive and persecute regular people who WILL do what they want regardless of what the law says.

We tried this experiment with alcohol and it was a miserable failure, we've tried this with drugs and that has been an even bigger failure, now you want to ratchet it up further because a hell of a lot more people smoke cigs than smoke pot. Talk about blood in the streets.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Hacp
This is going to help the poor actually. These people will buy less cigarettes, and smoke less, therefore decrease their chances of acquiring lung cancer and heart disease later in life.

How do you make these kind of statements and still fancy yourself a liberal?

He is a compassionate Liberal.

Sounds to me like he's just as "compassionate" as the Drug Warrior conservatives.

What's next? Bring back alcohol prohibition?

You're just as off base as you're buddy Bober.

Does alcohol cause cancer?

Why yes it does in fact.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Shivetya
The government needs to ban cigarettes.

Nothing like freedom, eh comrade?

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I wasn't aware of candy causing cancer.

No, but if you eat $9 worth of a candy a day you're going to end up with diabetes and heart disease.

Got any more bright comments, moron?

Of course I do. You should know better.

You honestly believe that if cigarettes were invented now that the FDA would allow them to be unleashed on the general public???

Are you going to answer the question Bober?

No, they wouldn't. That however is irrelevant, because if it were up to me the FDA wouldn't be able to ban substances. The FDA should be watchdogs, not policy makers. They can test them and advise on their use and even discourage use, but if I choose to ingest something even if the FDA has shown it to be dangerous than it's nobody's business but my own. If I want to eat lead paint chips and sniff glue, why should the government be allowed to tell me what I can and cannot do with my own body?

Do you hate freedom Dave? Are you a rabid pro-lifer? You must be, because you want to control what people do to their own bodies.

PS Are you ever going to address that thread from months ago where you call me a Bush Fanboy or some other lame dmctrollen phrase? You have yet to produce any evidence that I have ever in the past 8 years supported GW Bush. You're a hypocrite. And evil. Frankly I wish you were rotting in jail cell right now. The world would be a better place.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Hacp
This is going to help the poor actually. These people will buy less cigarettes, and smoke less, therefore decrease their chances of acquiring lung cancer and heart disease later in life.

How do you make these kind of statements and still fancy yourself a liberal?

He is a compassionate Liberal.

Sounds to me like he's just as "compassionate" as the Drug Warrior conservatives.

What's next? Bring back alcohol prohibition?

You're just as off base as you're buddy Bober.

Does alcohol cause cancer?

Why yes it does in fact.

DmcPwned.

Why isn't Dave banned yet?

Because it's not against the rules to be considered a loon by most of the membership. If it were there'd be many others here @ P&N that would be banned.

Anandtech Senior Moderator
Red Dawn

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
You're a hypocrite. And evil. Frankly I wish you were rotting in jail cell right now. The world would be a better place.

ouuch, that's kinda harsh man. Don't you think the padded room he lives in is good enough?

 

[piasabird]

In a way when the government has a high tax on something like tobacco, they are saying it is a product that they approve of. Otherwise it would be an illegal drug. This is just like gambling.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: Fern
And yes, black market cigarettes are already a problem. Over here in NC they busted a big ring of cigarette smuglers who were Al Qaeda.

That would be incorrect.

Two men, natives of Lebanon, were accused of smuggling at least $7.9 million worth of cigarettes out of North Carolina and selling them in Michigan. Though the dollar amount seems rather large it was probably 4 to 5 truckloads of smokes. They were found guilty of guilty of cigarette smuggling, racketeering and money laundering.

The profits from the bootlegging enterprise found their way to Hezbollah.

Being that the United States is one of the handful of countries in the world that catagorize Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, the two men fron Lebanon were also charged with supporting terror and sentenced to 155 years - this sentencing occurred a year or so after 9/11.

Hezbollah = Shia moderates
Al Qaeda = Sunni radicals
(and never the twain shall meet)

Though I cannot defend all of what they do, Hezbollah recognizes and promotes women?s rights in the western tradition as one of two major political parties that represent the Shia in Lebanon. As typical in that part of the world there is a small radical military off-shoot that thousands of Lebanese support. It is important to note that the 'Hezbollah' armed wing was never involved in the Lebanese civil war, and so did not fight against other Lebanese factions. They are highly recognized in Lebanon and tha Arab world as a legitimate resistance movement, a social and political organization and a force for democratic change.

Lebanon at one time could have been 'the model' for other middle eastern gov'ts to emulate but is flirting with civil war once again. Hezbollah has led millions of people in marches in support of peaceful change and a unity gov't. A coalition of Hezbollah, Sunni & Christian parties has withdrawn from the gov't because of undue western (i.e., US) involvement. Hezbollah itself is working to disarm its military wing but because there is effectively no Lebanese army no one wants to turn in their arms.

Don't let your FUD get in the way of the facts, Fern.

(I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread)

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Hacp
This is going to help the poor actually. These people will buy less cigarettes, and smoke less, therefore decrease their chances of acquiring lung cancer and heart disease later in life.

How do you make these kind of statements and still fancy yourself a liberal?

I'm anti-conservative, which automatically makes me a liberal.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Hacp
This is going to help the poor actually. These people will buy less cigarettes, and smoke less, therefore decrease their chances of acquiring lung cancer and heart disease later in life.

How do you make these kind of statements and still fancy yourself a liberal?

I'm anti-conservative, which automatically makes me a liberal.

No, it doesn't.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Hacp
This is going to help the poor actually. These people will buy less cigarettes, and smoke less, therefore decrease their chances of acquiring lung cancer and heart disease later in life.

How do you make these kind of statements and still fancy yourself a liberal?

I'm anti-conservative, which automatically makes me a liberal.

Try leftist. Most likely socialist big govt intrusion\oppression type.

 

[piasabird]

What does bootlegging cigarettes have to do with the tax? Is that another term for stealing tobacco? How do you bootleg tobacco? If I acquire tobacco seeds and plant them, is that bootlegging? I am kind of curious. I dont smoke but I have seen ads on the internet for packages of tobacco seeds. One plant can get up to 5 feet.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Vic
My concern is the government getting addicted to all this tobacco money.

They are already addicted.

Some states plan their budgets based on some of the punitive penalties that the tobacco companies have been ordered to pay over the next decade.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: Fern
And yes, black market cigarettes are already a problem. Over here in NC they busted a big ring of cigarette smuglers who were Al Qaeda.

That would be incorrect.

The profits from the bootlegging enterprise found their way to Hezbollah.

-snip-

OK, but I don't see how that changes my point. I just put in the wrong terrorist group's name.

Increasing taxes to high levels just encourages illegal means to circumvent it. Could be oragnized crime like a mafia group, or a terrorist group. Either way, it's a poor policy decision (for that and many other reasons noted above)

Fern

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: piasabird
What does bootlegging cigarettes have to do with the tax? Is that another term for stealing tobacco? How do you bootleg tobacco? If I acquire tobacco seeds and plant them, is that bootlegging? I am kind of curious. I dont smoke but I have seen ads on the internet for packages of tobacco seeds. One plant can get up to 5 feet.

Probably foreign companies who sneak cigarettes into the US without paying any tobacco taxes.