Federal Exise Tax on Cigerettes and Cigars

[piasabird]

Just start growing your own tobacco.

 

[Vic]

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?

They're referring to the various crime rings, Indian tribes, and websites that exist throughout the country that sell cigarettes without having paid the appropriate tax (and getting the tax stamp, look on the bottom of any pack).
Keep in mind that marijuana was originally made illegal in much the same way. A tax was established, with a stamp required, that no one was allowed to pay and acquire (essentially making the de facto cost of the tax infinite, even though the legislated amount was actually quite small).

What this gets back to is patently absurd anti-free market notion that any market can legislated out of existence, whether through sky-high tax or prohibition. That never happens. What does happen is that the market get shoved underground into illegal "black market" status, supply goes down while supplier risk increases dramatically, while demand remains unchecked, thereby prices inflate dramatically, etc etc. Worse yet is that black markets exist in a complete regulatory vacuum, escalating crime while removing consumer safeguards.

 

[rpanic]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: rpanic
Lung cancer killed the three of my grandparents that smoked, in a slow agonizingly painful death. Tax the crap out of it.

I'm sorry to hear your grandparents were stupid, and sadly it appears to be genetic.

you do know that odds are when his grandparents started smokeing they had DOCTORS saying it was safe and improve health?

I?m sure he was to stupid to think of that. Everyone smoked back then, nobody knew that they were going to get cancer. Or for that matter how addictive they were.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Just start growing your own tobacco.

Currently, many smokers also get around the tax by smoking "roll your own's," i.e. Bugler and Zig-Zags.

Tobacco is not easily grown in most of the country, so growing your own is not feasible. If it were, however, then government would have to penalize that as well, lest there be a gaping backdoor in policy.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: rpanic

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: rpanic
Lung cancer killed the three of my grandparents that smoked, in a slow agonizingly painful death. Tax the crap out of it.

I'm sorry to hear your grandparents were stupid, and sadly it appears to be genetic.

you do know that odds are when his grandparents started smokeing they had DOCTORS saying it was safe and improve health?

I?m sure he was to stupid to think of that. Everyone smoked back then, nobody knew that they were going to get cancer. Or for that matter how addictive they were.

Myth. References to cigarettes as "cancer sticks" and "coffin nails" can be found in popular media dating back to the 1880s.

 

[Genx87]

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.

I'd imagine bootlegging is cultivating, processing and selling tobacco in a black market to avoid the tax. It may only require the person purchase a legitimate product at wholesale market prices and bypass the tax.

You know a tax is too high when people are resorting to black markets to avoid the oppression.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: palehorse74
The irony is that the tax revenue required to fund the SCHIP would itself require roughly 24 million new smokers to do so.

I wanted to repost this because everyone seems to have missed or ignored this key point.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Vic
Worse yet is that black markets exist in a complete regulatory vacuum, escalating crime while removing consumer safeguards.

Consumer safeguards for cigarettes??? :shocked:

This is off the wall even for you.

 

[Rustler]

If people quit and they don't raise the amount projected they will tax something else or pull the money from somwhere.

 

[yllus]

*shrugs* Ban or tax away. Won't help. People I know up here do runs to the native reserves and buy them by the carton for pretty cheap.

I'm okay with this just as long as the pro-ban people are also in favour of banning alcohol and keeping marijuana illegal. Well, no, I'm not okay with it but it's amusing to see justifications of the hypocrisy pop up.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Rustler
If people quit and they don't raise the amount projected they will tax something else or pull the money from somwhere.

They will have to, nobody will cut any programs that is for damn sure!

 

[Fern]

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.

Sounds like it makes you a partisan hack.

WTH is "anti-conservative", you just oppose whatever conservatives (Repubs I guess) are for?

If you're going to go about opposing them, don't you feel a need to offer an alternative?

Fern

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: rpanic

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: rpanic
Lung cancer killed the three of my grandparents that smoked, in a slow agonizingly painful death. Tax the crap out of it.

I'm sorry to hear your grandparents were stupid, and sadly it appears to be genetic.

you do know that odds are when his grandparents started smokeing they had DOCTORS saying it was safe and improve health?

I?m sure he was to stupid to think of that. Everyone smoked back then, nobody knew that they were going to get cancer. Or for that matter how addictive they were.

So 41 years ago when the Surgeon Generals warning was mandated on every pack of cigarettes, they stopped right?

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: Fern

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.

Sounds like it makes you a partisan hack.

WTH is "anti-conservative", you just oppose whatever conservatives (Repubs I guess) are for?

If you're going to go about opposing them, don't you fell a need to offer an alternative?

Fern

Anti-conservative, not conservative, take it for whatever you want. Theres also nothing wrong with being partisan.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic
Worse yet is that black markets exist in a complete regulatory vacuum, escalating crime while removing consumer safeguards.

Consumer safeguards for cigarettes??? :shocked:

This is off the wall even for you.

Dave, I'm sure you realize that despite their harmful effects, cigarettes are regulated. They can and will get worse if everything is driven underground.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Fern

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.

Sounds like it makes you a partisan hack.

WTH is "anti-conservative", you just oppose whatever conservatives (Repubs I guess) are for?

If you're going to go about opposing them, don't you fell a need to offer an alternative?

Fern

Anti-conservative, not conservative, take it for whatever you want. Theres also nothing wrong with being partisan.

Well there is a pretty big difference between not being conservative and being anti-conservative.....you understand that right?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: yllus
*shrugs* Ban or tax away. Won't help. People I know up here do runs to the native reserves and buy them by the carton for pretty cheap.

I'm okay with this just as long as the pro-ban people are also in favour of banning alcohol and keeping marijuana illegal. Well, no, I'm not okay with it but it's amusing to see justifications of the hypocrisy pop up.

Americans are quite the masters in hypocrisy and have gotten much better at it the last seven years.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic
Worse yet is that black markets exist in a complete regulatory vacuum, escalating crime while removing consumer safeguards.

Consumer safeguards for cigarettes??? :shocked:

This is off the wall even for you.

Dave, I'm sure you realize that despite their harmful effects, cigarettes are regulated. They can and will get worse if everything is driven underground.

You call regulated for the money a consumer safeguard? :roll:

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Fern

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.

Sounds like it makes you a partisan hack.

WTH is "anti-conservative", you just oppose whatever conservatives (Repubs I guess) are for?

If you're going to go about opposing them, don't you fell a need to offer an alternative?

Fern

Anti-conservative, not conservative, take it for whatever you want. Theres also nothing wrong with being partisan.

Well there is a pretty big difference between not being conservative and being anti-conservative.....you understand that right?

I'm against many conservative ideals. Lets put it at that.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Fern

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.

Sounds like it makes you a partisan hack.

WTH is "anti-conservative", you just oppose whatever conservatives (Repubs I guess) are for?

If you're going to go about opposing them, don't you fell a need to offer an alternative?

Fern

Anti-conservative, not conservative, take it for whatever you want. Theres also nothing wrong with being partisan.

Well there is a pretty big difference between not being conservative and being anti-conservative.....you understand that right?

I'm against many conservative ideals. Lets put it at that.

Such as?

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Fern

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.

Sounds like it makes you a partisan hack.

WTH is "anti-conservative", you just oppose whatever conservatives (Repubs I guess) are for?

If you're going to go about opposing them, don't you fell a need to offer an alternative?

Fern

Anti-conservative, not conservative, take it for whatever you want. Theres also nothing wrong with being partisan.

Well there is a pretty big difference between not being conservative and being anti-conservative.....you understand that right?

I'm against many conservative ideals. Lets put it at that.

Such as?

Small government, deregulation, social spending cuts, big military, follow the American way or else social attitude.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: Fern

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.

Sounds like it makes you a partisan hack.

WTH is "anti-conservative", you just oppose whatever conservatives (Repubs I guess) are for?

If you're going to go about opposing them, don't you fell a need to offer an alternative?

Fern

Anti-conservative, not conservative, take it for whatever you want. Theres also nothing wrong with being partisan.

Well there is a pretty big difference between not being conservative and being anti-conservative.....you understand that right?

I'm against many conservative ideals. Lets put it at that.

Such as?

Small government, deregulation, social spending cuts, big military, follow the American way or else social attitude.

So basically you are against everything that this country was founded on. Well, except for "big military", but that came about because of necessity.

 

[rpanic]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: rpanic

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: rpanic
Lung cancer killed the three of my grandparents that smoked, in a slow agonizingly painful death. Tax the crap out of it.

I'm sorry to hear your grandparents were stupid, and sadly it appears to be genetic.

you do know that odds are when his grandparents started smokeing they had DOCTORS saying it was safe and improve health?

I?m sure he was to stupid to think of that. Everyone smoked back then, nobody knew that they were going to get cancer. Or for that matter how addictive they were.

Myth. References to cigarettes as "cancer sticks" and "coffin nails" can be found in popular media dating back to the 1880s.

Vic you are so full of crap.

http://www.txtwriter.com/Onsci...es/smokingcancer2.html

http://www.mrc.ac.uk/YourHealt...very/Smoking/MRC003518


First the medical and scientific community did not know that much about the connections between cancer and smoking before the 50s. The first report from the US Surgeon General about smoking and lung cancer didn?t even come out till 1964.
I don?t think so many people back then would have been smoking if they knew what we know now.

And because I know you like charts Vic you can see how the publics view changed

http://www.cancer.org/common/i...leanAirLawsGraphic.JPG

As far as the OP making it illegal that would be dumb because we would just be handing the business over to criminals. Tax it enough so it?s cheaper on average than the black-market.

 

[Hacp]

So basically you are against everything that this country was founded on. Well, except for "big military", but that came about because of necessity.

You mean no taxation without representation and civil liberties? I never said I wasn't for those ideals.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Hacp

So basically you are against everything that this country was founded on. Well, except for "big military", but that came about because of necessity.

You mean no taxation without representation and civil liberties? I never said I wasn't for those ideals.

No, small government, less government intrusion into our lives (less regulation), and less social spending....If they were for any of this, they would have formed a large government with high taxes and huge welfare programs. You are certainly entitled to your views and I'm not criticizing you for believing the way that you do, but if you think that those views are in line with the founding principles of this country you are wrong.