Smokers feeling abused as federal tax hike hits

You know I don't smoke, but I don't understand why smokers are getting such a raw deal.

Heck, abortion is more of a life/health issue.

[edit on 043030p://bThursday2009 by Stormdancer777]

reply to post by jackieps1975


Apparently they're still pretty affordable down south.

Chicago's just as much of a police state too, Some stores are charging $96. a carton. I have to drive out to another county to get them for $49. now

Don't even ask what we pay for rent out here. Been here all my life, but i'm seriously thinkin about movin, just too expensive.

Well I know how people can fight back, if everyone quit smoking, there would be nothing to tax,

Cigs will soon be purchased underground.

People need to get creative.

reply to post by chise61

Chicago's just as much of a police state too, Some stores are charging $96.

Holy cow, I had no idea.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by Griff
Look it up, cosmetics have more carcinogens than cigs.

but they don't touch your lungs bro
they aren't smoked

Says whom? I am extremely allergic to strong perfume and have had to pop benadryl for years while at work or out in the public lest I have to be rushed to the emergency room because my lungs and airways completely close off. These taxes are just money making schemes.

I saw the proposal for for seatbelt laws and such that were implemented in NC. Guess what it wasn't about safety. It had a lot of footnotes regarding estimated amount of fees the state would receive from those accidentally not buckling up or do not like seat belts pulling at them. It looks better on paper to promote safety features although seatbelts and airbags themselves can kill you. The same goes for this proposal, it looks good to say it will help children although as we know with most things in government most of that money will vanish. If it were really about health all cash would be funneled into no cost stop smoking programs, not something unrelated.

If you want to tax sin taxes make it across the board. Strong perfume, doughnuts, large vehicles, televisions. If you are over a certain weight then you should be taxed heavily on all food so you can't afford to overeat and fill the hospital with clogged arteries and heart procedures. I'm sure the emissions from one car are far worse than standing up under a smoker screaming, "I smell smoke!" It is like smelling a dead animal. If the smell offends you, use the feet attached to your body and move from it.

But, anyway scream and rant that you smell smoke from one person while at the same time 100 cars have passed you spraying carbon monoxide into your lungs.

reply to post by SemperParatusRJCC


How long have you been using the e-cig?

Are you satisfied with it ?

Have you noticed any improvement in your lungs, sense of taste or smell, energy, etc ?

reply to post by johnsky


You said your's is black and gold, is it the one from Crown7 ?

I see you seem to have had good results with the one you have. I've been looking into them, but i'm having a hard time deciding which one to go with. It would be helpful to know if others that have already used them are satisfied with them.

I want to try them mainly for health reasons, but i'm also fed up with paying all these taxes on my cigarettes.

Originally posted by sos37
Others simply don't want to because they don't like being told what they can and cannot do, which is where I suspect your anger to be coming from.

No, I quit way before the tax increase on my own because I was sick of it.

I also noted that you forgot to study up on cosmetics.

As far as your "studies" about vehicles. No where does it say anything about vehicle related cancer. So your "I bet there are less cancer related deaths" is just what? Your guess with no back-up.

Here's some info.

Study Links Vehicle Exhaust, Lung Cancer Mortality in Trucking Industry Workers

www.businessfleet.com...

So, my rant stands.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


Yep it's ludicrous, and there are those that wonder why we're complaing.

I'd like to see what some of their reactions would be if they went out to dinner and the bill was $50. and when they went to pay it, they were told that they had to pay $100. because of taxes. You better believe they'd be complaining too.

I started rolling my own due to the taxes on tobacco. I then loved it so much the only time I buy a pack is when I have to drive long distances. The tobacco tastes a lot better and doesn't mess up my sinuses like manufactured cigarettes. I don't even some as much because I would assume it has less chemicals added to it. I buy "Peter Stokkebye" canned tobacco and its the bomb. I just bought the london blend and its pretty smooth. I bought 2 cans and those things lasted me like 2.5 months which is a lot of tobacco.


www.pipesandcigars.com...

Originally posted by chise61
reply to post by SemperParatusRJCC

 

How long have you been using the e-cig?

Are you satisfied with it ?

Have you noticed any improvement in your lungs, sense of taste or smell, energy, etc ?

Originally posted by SemperParatusRJCC
reply to post by johnsky

 

I agree with you whole heartedly and it pays for itself. You no longer need to worry about matches or lighters. And the price isnt that bad. every cartridge is like a pack anyhow.

I personally had one for 3 months and I too have felt rejuvenated. My cough stopped and I found out I can actually run as far as I wanted within normal physical limits.

what im saying is if they ban e-cigs or raise the price Ill be pissed. I can actually take 3 puffs every now and then at work. just to get that craving. I'll stand up and say screw you Obama you punk bitch.... pardon my language, but its too re-god-damn-diculous. This is no way to bring the money back to our country.

Tax chocolate.. make those lazy slobs pay the extra money for the fat their packing which leads to medical problems and not to mention the dental later on down the road.

I went to epuffer.com and purchased the starter kit, not the same place as SemperParatusRJCC's website, a link that is also in this thread. Page 6 I believe.

Nothing but what i like to call obama tax.

To keep us poor people even poorer.
And to let us know we have no say in this country what so ever.

Dont ask what you country can do for ...
Ask what can you do for your country...

OK......
What can i do for my country to stop obama from taxing us to the point i can barely feed my kid's..with out his welfare?

What can i do mr.president?????
Work 3 job's 40+ hours a week..Just to pay your tax's?

Stop taxing my fellow American's to the point we are about to rip our own heads off.
You are dividing us..not uniting us.

I feel America is about to biol over soon.
Good or bad..Probably bad....We will have to confront this dictator named obama....As we the people....
United not Divided..as he want's.
www.ssa.gov...
Thats right They now Tax your Tax's....your social security you pay in..Now taxed.
God i am really hating my kid's future..in this country..Heaven help us all.

[edit on 2-4-2009 by TheAmused]

reply to post by constantine70


Thanks, i must have missed that one.

reply to post by Stormdancer777

Cigs will soon be purchased underground.

That's a thing of the past. It's been going on for a long while. People go across the state lines and bring the smokes back, and then they sell them for a cheaper price. No taxes.

Originally posted by saturnsrings
May as well tax a round of golf at about 30% then move on to minnows and worms too fishermen will love that..

I had to laugh at that one. It reminded me of a report I heard tonight on the local Tulsa version of CBS.

It seems that cattlemen are up in arms because there is a bill to tax them on the gas their cows emit.

And no, I'm not kidding.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by Griff
Look it up, cosmetics have more carcinogens than cigs.

but they don't touch your lungs bro
they aren't smoked

Modern, they may not touch your lungs, but how about the fact they do get into your pores, which also can get into your blood stream, isn't this in fact worse???

Just a thought...

Personally, I want to quit so bad, the hike in expense is going to help me do it, I had already cut down considerably, first time in to buy under the new prices and I have already cut down even more, soon it will just be a memory that I smoked.

Hilarious thread. Got the same hilarious rantings a couple of years back over here when they banned smoking from pubs.

The EPA identified and confirmed the following compounds found in these fragrance products: •ethanol •camphene •Beta-pinene •Beta-myrcene •benzaldehyde •limonene •benzyl alcohol •Beta-phenethyl alcohol •citronellal •camphor •benzyl acetate •estragole •Alpha-cedrene •Alpha-pinene •diethylene glycol mnoethyl ether •linalool •Alpha-terpineol •Beta-citronellol . Other compounds identified were: •acetone •t-butanol •ethyl acetate •toluene •3-octanone •cineole •2-ethyl-1-hexanol* •phenylacetaidehyde •terpinen-4-ol* •menthyl acetate.
All of these chemicals have been shown in animal studies to cause serious health problems and death in animals.

In 1989, the National Institute of Occupational Safety & Health recognized 884 poisonous substances (many synthetically derived from petrochemicals) from a list of 2,983 chemicals used in the fragrance industry capable of causing cancer, birth defects, central nervous system disorders, allergic respiratory reactions, skin and eye irritations. According to the National Institute of Health, in view of the escalating incidence of cancer, as well as a 58% increase in asthma over the past decade, this information is crucial. Nearly 72% of asthmatics have adverse reactions to perfume, and at least 35 million Americans are afflicted with allergic reactions and hypersensitivity diseases -- among the most costly of U.S. health problems. Today, these statistics have grown at an alarming rate.

Tests conducted at Anderson Laboratories of West Hartford, Vermont in 1998, researchers determined that emissions from fragrances caused various combinations of sensory irritation, pulmonary irritation and decreases in functional observation battery indicative of neurotoxicity. Chemicals that stimulate the trigeminal nerve system have the capacity to trigger not just irritant trigeminal effects but also excessive neurological firing and excitotoxicity in vulnerable individuals, leading to attention deficit disorders, disorientation, spaciness, memory problems, concentration difficulties, mental confusion and cognitive deficits. I wonder? Could these chemicals actually be the cause of Alzeimer's disease that is now being seen in people as young as 55-60?

Anderson's independent laboratory research revealed that several typical eau de parfums have readily demonstrated toxic properties. "When mice breathed these vapors [for one hour], they developed a number of signs of neurotoxicity (tremors, loss of balance, twitching, abnormal repetitive movements, altered posture and gait, etc.); some were so severely damaged they died as a result of breathing these fragrance products. Mice also developed decreased expiratory air flow as if they were having an asthmatic attack while breathing the eau de parfum. These were normal mice just prior to their exposure to these fragrance products." Anderson's research and findings, Acute Toxic Effects of Fragrance Products, were published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal

In March 1999, the Journal of the American Medical Association, reported that: "Women exposed at work to organic solvents are 13 times more likely to run a risk of major fetal malformations, and many of the jobs in which such exposure is common tend to be dominated by women. The list of suspect chemicals reads like the contents of a toxic waste dump: aromatic hydrocarbons, phenols, trichloroethylene, xylene, vinyl chloride, acetone and related chemicals. The solvents and many others are part of many people's workday world and can have significant consequences for infants, such as deafness, spina bifida, heart abnormalities and extremity defects."

Even the American Lung Association's pamphlet, "Facts About Home Control of Allergies and Asthma," recommends methods of controlling allergy and asthma triggers: "source elimination, particularly of tobacco smoke, wood smoke, pet dander, cockroaches, indoor molds and fumes from household cleaners and perfumes." What is is that the ALA knows that we the average consumer doesn't?

In The Toledo Blade News, "Synthetic Musks Linked to Environmental Risks," March 24, 1999, scientists report: "Synthetic fragrances used in perfumes, soaps, ... fabric softeners, cosmetics and scores of other consumer products have become a new and unexpected group of environmental contaminants. The chemicals are accumulating in human fat tissue, blood, breast milk, drinking water supplies, lakes and streams, fish and wildlife, and elsewhere in the environment. There is reason for public concern about possible effects of these fragrances. One compound, musk xylene, has carcinogenic, or cancer-causing, effects in laboratory mice. Another, musk ketone, damages genes in animal experiments and has other worrisome effects. Dr. Gerhard G. Rimkus estimated that 8,000 tons of synthetic musk fragrances are produced annually. The compounds can be absorbed through the skin and tend to build up in fat tissue. They get into the environment in sewage and wastewater. Synthetic musk compounds are major chemical contaminants in many samples of water and fish." And the FDA still has not reacted to this vsery serious health hazard?

Recently, the Environmental Health Network's has petitioned the FDA to declare "Eternity" misbranded. This means the makers of "Eternity" have not properly labeled the ingredients used in "Eternity" as required by federal law. Numerous chemicals have been shown to cause everything from cancers to neurological problems in research studies. Yet, the FDA also fails to act on these recent studies. Do yourself a favor visit these websites to learn more about this every serious health problem. Did you know that synthetic musk is banned in England because they know it causes cancer! Did you know that BENZALDEHYDE , a chemical known to cause kidney damage in humans is used in fragrances? That BENZYL ACETATE used in fragrances is linked to causing pancreatic cancer. That ETHYL ACETATE is on the EPA Hazardous Waste known as a carcinogenic causing kidney and liver failure is used in fragrances. Can I ask, do we need a brick to fall on our heads before we will do something about this? We will wait until one of our loved one or friends actually dies from this toxic poisioning, like Cindy Duehring and Julia Kendall did. I'm sorry, but this attitude that many people nowadays have that as long as it doesn't affect them, why bother with something lke this just does not sit well with me. This type of attitude must stop.

In my opinion, what the fragrance industry has done is no different than what the tobacco industry did for years. The industry hide the truth of the very serious health effects of gases and chemicals from cigarettes. And now the the industries that make perfumes, colognes, personal care products, detergents, pesticides have been doing the same identical thing. When is this madness going to stop? Hello corporations making these products...don't you realize that if you wind up making your customers very ill or killing off your customers you won't have any customers buying your product? And when will the FDA act upon this. Well folks, the FDA won't until there is such a public outcry. That is where you can help. There is so much extensive and valid information on this very serious health hazard that I cannot provide all of it in this column. However, I can direct you to several websites that have extensive information and studies concerning this.

www.dldewey.com...

I saw this a couple times, about being taxed without representation. I don't think everyone clearly understands what that statement means.

We as citizens are allowed to vote, and those votes count. We are being represented. Each state is represented in congress in more than one way. We are being represented.

It does not mean that the average Joe has a direct "voice" in the government, but they are being represented by someone.

Since each state is being represented in congress, we cannot say "no taxation without representation". Say Cuba was a "colony" of America. They had no congress representative, but we taxed them. That is illegal.

Now as for congress working for corporate America instead of citizens? That falls under corruption. While "legal" in one term, it is "illegal" in another. Problem is they all work together; we need a whole new congress who is above bribes.

I know why the tax is in place. I know smokers are very upset about it, I would be too. I think while it is legal, it is wrong. America is facing problems, and taxing sins is not the answer. Correcting the corruption that has a strangle hold on Corporate America, and so many government bodies...that is the fix.

The government no longer fears it's people. The people need to remind the government who exactly is in charge. Who elected them, and who has the power to remove them. As long as the people accept what the government is doing there will be no change for the better. The rich will get richer, the poor will stay poor. And bad times will become the norm, and worse times will arrive.

America will not loose it's soil to wars, invasions, terrorist. No, she will slowly taken over from the inside out, by corrupt Americans. America, will be bought and owned by another nation.