New tax idea below...
Last edited:
Oh boy MORE CHANGE!! Smokers. (better not look)
- Thread starter Mr Bogus
- Start date
Tax anyone making over 1 million a year, Take the over 1 million they make and give it to to health care and the busa bash.
We should get all expenses paid to the bash for our mental health. Any one should be able to survive on 1 million a year...
I may run for president someday
We should get all expenses paid to the bash for our mental health. Any one should be able to survive on 1 million a year...
I may run for president someday
Already done.
It makes perfect sense if you are looking for ways to cut down on meat consumption and recoup environmental losses," said Bruce Friedrich, a spokesman in Washington for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
You see Ladies and Gentleman, this will never end. The EPA, tree hugger's, PITA along with Politicians nothing will stop.
Sun, water and wind will be next.
r8
Proposed Cow "Gas" Tax Angers Farmers
Last edited:
Really pizzes me off, people trying to control others. "Clean air" :bs: DoItell you what you shouldnt do? But hey, it's cool if everyone stops smoking. Then it would eleminate even more jobs. How is Obama gonna sign this seeing as how he himself smokes?
And you think they are going to stop with just smoking? Wait till they move on to alcohol (causes more health problems than smoking does now a days), next will be unhealthy foods (obesity is another health problem that they will try to control). And then what? Next will be MUCH higher luxury taxes, and what do think motorcycles will be classified as. Not to mention that they are so dangerous and cost the health industry so much money to treat injured riders. Do you get the idea of why I don't like these Washington *******s taxing one thing to pay for another?
Sounds fair to me, $200 a cigarette.
Yeah, tax on Soda in New York is still being pushed.
r8
These days, sugary drinks are to American health roughly what tobacco was a generation ago. A tax would shift some consumers, especially kids, to diet drinks or water.
Moonbattery: NY Times Gushes Over Soda Tax
FOXNews.com - New Yorks Soda Tax Scam - Opinion
Last edited:
it is worse... you are going to have people dropping a policy they pay for because there will be a "free" one dangled in their faces...Yeah, real fair. I have to pay for worthless shmucks to get insurance because they refuse to get it for themselves. That's:bs: I pay for my own insurance they can too
Just one more step closer to Socialism
Already posted yesterday by yours truly.
"People who were already able to afford health care began to stop paying for it so they could get it for free," said Dr. Kenny Fink, the administrator for Med-QUEST at the Department of Human Services. "I don't believe that was the intent of the program."
r8
FOXNews.com - Hawaii Ends Universal Child Health Care 7 Months After Start - Health News | Current Health News | Medical News
Last edited:
The problem with a tax like this is that it is solely based on the sales of a product.
What comes to mind is the gasoline tax.
When oil execs raised the price of gasoline to an unbearable level, demand dropped.
When people stopped purchasing as much gas that impacted how much money the government was receiving in taxes because less product was being sold.
Federal agency’s were pushing to increase the tax on fuel since they were not making as much money because people could not afford to purchase fuel and sales has drastically fallen.
Federal agency’s stated they needed the money to keep up with repairs on highways and such.
Someone else earlier in this post had made a comment that if they increase the price of cigarettes, more people will probably quit which will lower demand and lower sales so they will end up receiving less money and they will then start looking at trying to get money from other sources to provide the level of funding they had speculated they would receive from the hike on the cigarette tax.
Personally, I don’t smoke, no one in my family smokes except my mom, I could careless if a pack of cigarettes cost $10.00 a pack. But I do think it this will put us on a course that will impact non smokers in the future at some point.
The government often has hidden agendas, just like the California lottery.
Man that one pisses me off. When they first introduced the lottery for it to be voted on it was sold as a way to help schools, that a large amount of the money made from the lottery was going to go to California schools.
Well yes, a large amount of the lottery money goes to California schools, what California did NOT tell voters is when the lottery started putting money into schools, California was going to withdraw funding that the state was providing to the schools.
California schools in the end never received more money, it just came from a different source, and this little shell game in the end just freed up more money for the states to squander and misuse.
So at face value “Increase tax on cigarettes to help children” might sound like a good idea, but it is just another example of the government manipulating the population in order to take more money from us.
They could very well do the same thing California did, used the tax increase to go to the medical community but then withdraw funding from somewhere else, so in the end the extra money is really doing anything for what the intended purposes was, it basically in the end is providing additional funding for something voters either never voted on and/or would never approve of
What comes to mind is the gasoline tax.
When oil execs raised the price of gasoline to an unbearable level, demand dropped.
When people stopped purchasing as much gas that impacted how much money the government was receiving in taxes because less product was being sold.
Federal agency’s were pushing to increase the tax on fuel since they were not making as much money because people could not afford to purchase fuel and sales has drastically fallen.
Federal agency’s stated they needed the money to keep up with repairs on highways and such.
Someone else earlier in this post had made a comment that if they increase the price of cigarettes, more people will probably quit which will lower demand and lower sales so they will end up receiving less money and they will then start looking at trying to get money from other sources to provide the level of funding they had speculated they would receive from the hike on the cigarette tax.
Personally, I don’t smoke, no one in my family smokes except my mom, I could careless if a pack of cigarettes cost $10.00 a pack. But I do think it this will put us on a course that will impact non smokers in the future at some point.
The government often has hidden agendas, just like the California lottery.
Man that one pisses me off. When they first introduced the lottery for it to be voted on it was sold as a way to help schools, that a large amount of the money made from the lottery was going to go to California schools.
Well yes, a large amount of the lottery money goes to California schools, what California did NOT tell voters is when the lottery started putting money into schools, California was going to withdraw funding that the state was providing to the schools.
California schools in the end never received more money, it just came from a different source, and this little shell game in the end just freed up more money for the states to squander and misuse.
So at face value “Increase tax on cigarettes to help children” might sound like a good idea, but it is just another example of the government manipulating the population in order to take more money from us.
They could very well do the same thing California did, used the tax increase to go to the medical community but then withdraw funding from somewhere else, so in the end the extra money is really doing anything for what the intended purposes was, it basically in the end is providing additional funding for something voters either never voted on and/or would never approve of
Last edited:
Ok so I looked at the Demographics of Tobacco use and I noticed a few things:
1. Only 1 out of the dozens of quotes was cited
2. None of the statistics were cited
3. No information on the survey that produced the data was given
4. There was no mention of a breakdown by political affiliation
This doesn't lend much credability to your deduction about the how much liberals vs conservatives actually smoke. I am not saying they are wrong because I have no way to tell without citation.
Last edited:
Here are some links about companies wanting to raise fuel tax because sales have dropped.. just fricken kills me. They are going to get their money from us one way or another, even if they have to hold a gun to our head
Poor auto makers
Steve Parker: White House: Move up CAFE Regs; Execs: Higher Gas Tax Needed; Hybrid Sales Falter
Poor states not making enough money because sales are down
Pantagraph.com | Editorial | Gasoline taxes already high enough in Illinois
Poorest Would Be Hurt by Tax Hikes - washingtonpost.com
Poor auto makers
Steve Parker: White House: Move up CAFE Regs; Execs: Higher Gas Tax Needed; Hybrid Sales Falter
Poor states not making enough money because sales are down
Pantagraph.com | Editorial | Gasoline taxes already high enough in Illinois
Poorest Would Be Hurt by Tax Hikes - washingtonpost.com
I'm telling you Sir, and I think you already got it, we are in for hard times like never seen before.
What will the crime rate become when everyone becomes desperate?
r8
Good article, relating to R8's question. You will not become optomistic reading it.
http://www.frbatlanta.org/filelegacydocs/zbecsi.pdf
Where is the funding for more Police?
Wait! Will just use our own Military!
Remember Waco?
Great article. Actually..shocking.
I'm working on the latest news release, which is impossible to find, regarding taxpayers posting bond for criminals.
r8
Wait! Will just use our own Military!
Remember Waco?
Great article. Actually..shocking.
I'm working on the latest news release, which is impossible to find, regarding taxpayers posting bond for criminals.
r8
Last edited:
Similar threads
