WHY IS THE GOVERNEMNT HATING ON THE TOBACCO INDUSTRY?!
- Thread starter Rasan
- Start date
its because its cool to pick on smokers now days.
all the uppity liberals pushing that **** feel better telling other people what, when, and where they can do it.
plus they are using the excuse that they are concerned for your health just to raise taxes to support the other socialist causes, especially here in California
BTW i have never smoked in my life
all the uppity liberals pushing that **** feel better telling other people what, when, and where they can do it.
plus they are using the excuse that they are concerned for your health just to raise taxes to support the other socialist causes, especially here in California
BTW i have never smoked in my life
it's a filthy habit - I used to do it and several of my friends still do (although less nowadays they in the past). I'm all for banning smoking in as many public places as possible - I don't mind smokers killing themselves, but it's bullshit when they try and kill me with them. As for the prices being raised - why not? It's not like they're NOT going to pay the extra - they're hooked. $2.60 extra for a fix isn't a big deal really - if smokers aren't happy with the price increase, there's nothing stopping them from quitting.
I used to think that governments liked smoking because of all the money it made from tax. It took me a while to realise, however, that smokers cost the government billions of dollars every year in medical costs, so it's not as though the government is actually making much profit from cigarette taxes anyway.
I used to think that governments liked smoking because of all the money it made from tax. It took me a while to realise, however, that smokers cost the government billions of dollars every year in medical costs, so it's not as though the government is actually making much profit from cigarette taxes anyway.
so how would you like it if the government decided to tax taco trucks (and i am using that example because they are really big in Cali), lets say something like $20.00 per every $3.00 burrito so now they are $23.00, or ordinary $1.00 tacos get taxed $10.00 to make them $11.00???
i mean they make us fat, high blood presure, sugar diabtes, ect...............
my point is that the governent shouldnt tax cigs like they are and they shouldnt ban it in PRIVATELY OWNED facilities. if they want to ban it in PUBLICALLY OWNED Facilities thats fine.
but if i own a restuarant, I should set the rules on smoking. If i want smoking that i should be able to allow it. If NON-Smokers dont come to MY restuarnat good for them, that would be their choice.
i mean they make us fat, high blood presure, sugar diabtes, ect...............
my point is that the governent shouldnt tax cigs like they are and they shouldnt ban it in PRIVATELY OWNED facilities. if they want to ban it in PUBLICALLY OWNED Facilities thats fine.
but if i own a restuarant, I should set the rules on smoking. If i want smoking that i should be able to allow it. If NON-Smokers dont come to MY restuarnat good for them, that would be their choice.
i dont know. i dont smoke.
but i also dont want to tell others what they can and cant do on their own property.
smoking at a restaurant wont kill me because if i dont want to breathe smoke i WONT go to that restaurant.
if i decide to go to that restaurant once or twice a month because i like the food so much i that i wont mind breathing in some smoke for a half hour or so then i will go. it won kill me.
but i also dont want to tell others what they can and cant do on their own property.
smoking at a restaurant wont kill me because if i dont want to breathe smoke i WONT go to that restaurant.
if i decide to go to that restaurant once or twice a month because i like the food so much i that i wont mind breathing in some smoke for a half hour or so then i will go. it won kill me.
^^^ lol, true. I've got nothing against people smoking on their private property - the government's not trying to ban that though (and they'd be screwed if they did!). 99% of resturant owners, if given the choice, would make their resturants non-smoking because theres a lot more non-smokers out there than there are smokers and their business would decline dramatically.
I'd laugh if they taxed taco's and burritos - I think the whole industry would collapse overnight. The amount of tax on smoking is pretty low comapred to other drugs though. If you consider how cheap it is to produce some of the harder drugs, and the prices they sell for, sometimes it can be thousands of percent higher than the price of production. The only difference is that cigarette tax is going to the government. Why don't crack whores petition their dealers and complain about the ridiculous prices? Because they're hooked, just like smokers (I'm not directly comparing smokers to crack whores, cigarettes are definitely one of the better 'drugs'), and are willing to pay anything to get their fix. Why not charge the earth?
I'd laugh if they taxed taco's and burritos - I think the whole industry would collapse overnight. The amount of tax on smoking is pretty low comapred to other drugs though. If you consider how cheap it is to produce some of the harder drugs, and the prices they sell for, sometimes it can be thousands of percent higher than the price of production. The only difference is that cigarette tax is going to the government. Why don't crack whores petition their dealers and complain about the ridiculous prices? Because they're hooked, just like smokers (I'm not directly comparing smokers to crack whores, cigarettes are definitely one of the better 'drugs'), and are willing to pay anything to get their fix. Why not charge the earth?
It's all mumbo jumbo B.S. if they really wanted to make a difference and if they were really concerned with our health, they'd ban the sale of tobacco products all together.
Lobbiest put too much money in political pockets to outlaw 'em, plus the taxes they contribute to the state and federal economy would be too big a loss of revenue to ban them...
Lobbiest put too much money in political pockets to outlaw 'em, plus the taxes they contribute to the state and federal economy would be too big a loss of revenue to ban them...
^^^No, do you guys know right now at this moment, its illegal for a mother/father to be smoking in their car with their kids(cant remember age limit--5 or 10?)in the car?...Which is absolutely a good thing, but its not illegal for a pregnant mother to smoke???wtf?? thats only in CA. All those truth campaigns finally caught some attention though and the GOV. realized that the tobacco companies are making more money then GOV. officials and they seen that as a way to raise taxes on it and get themselves and every state officials more money. All those TRUTH campaigns could be done in the same fashion about cats in congress or the white house only on a totally different level. If somebody really wanted to kick up dust(theyd probably get killed) they could do some TRUTH-type shit about the US Government, you know. Probably learn some shit thatd blow minds.
but havent they banned smoking in private establishments like restaurants, bars, nightclubs, ect.................
thats my point, it should be their choice. it shouldnt be state mandated.
shouldnt it be up to that owner if they want to allow smoking or not? if they lose business that should be their choice .
and if 99% were the case, that would mean that NON-Smokers should have no problem finding a NON-Smoking restaurant, right????
i am not sying that, but even if it were so, shouldnt that restaurant owner have that choice. that owner should be able to make it a smoking and/or non smoking restaurant simply because it is his. he has to make that business decision.
exactly, and if the owner allows smoking and losing his clientel then that is his fault. it was his choice.
they dont simply because if non smokers dont want to breathe in smoke they could be to another reastaurant. no1 would be forcing them to go to that particular restaurant that allows a section for smokers.
thats my point, it should be their choice. it shouldnt be state mandated.
shouldnt it be up to that owner if they want to allow smoking or not? if they lose business that should be their choice .
and if 99% were the case, that would mean that NON-Smokers should have no problem finding a NON-Smoking restaurant, right????
i am not sying that, but even if it were so, shouldnt that restaurant owner have that choice. that owner should be able to make it a smoking and/or non smoking restaurant simply because it is his. he has to make that business decision.
exactly, and if the owner allows smoking and losing his clientel then that is his fault. it was his choice.
they dont simply because if non smokers dont want to breathe in smoke they could be to another reastaurant. no1 would be forcing them to go to that particular restaurant that allows a section for smokers.