Smokers feeling abused as federal tax hike hits

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.

Originally posted by Shadowflux
reply to post by johnsky

 

Thanks for the info, my brother doesn't have a computer so he is a bit of a slave to propaganda from time to time. As much as I like smoking I suppose I would be willing to give the e-cigs a shot as long as they're not more expensive than regular cigs.

From what I've heard the e-cig is basically a small vaporizer, does this mean that one could put.....well...things other than nicotine in them?

Do these light up when you drag on them like the Japanese ones do?

Mine makes a bluish light when you puff on it. Its perfect. and in theory I suppose you could put other "things" in the e-cigs

God..the prices here in the Uk have been obscene for a long time,ive just gotten used to it i guess.I buy rolling tobacco(golden virginia) rather than cigarettes....what can you do..the whole propaganda with smokers is working here in the uk atleast,ive often been looked at or tutted at like some sort of sex pest for lighting up in public.I wonder why they are not up in arms from the poisons they breath in all the time from pollution in the air rather than second hand smoke?..yeah thats right,the media doesn't talk about it thats why.

You guys have me almost convinced about these e-cigs. Can you link me to some information on how much they cost, where I can buy them, what company makes them etc?

I rarely ever buy anything online so the clincher for me would be the ability to walk in a shop and buy some. I'll just have to get out of the habit of flicking my smokes into the street when I'm done.

Originally posted by Shadowflux
You guys have me almost convinced about these e-cigs. Can you link me to some information on how much they cost, where I can buy them, what company makes them etc?

I rarely ever buy anything online so the clincher for me would be the ability to walk in a shop and buy some. I'll just have to get out of the habit of flicking my smokes into the street when I'm done.

E-cigs
Heres where I got mine from.

reply to post by SemperParatusRJCC


I buy the liquid nicotine refill which costs me about $7.50 and is the equivalent of 400 cigarettes. The cartridges are more expensive.

It's only been two weeks and have tried a cigarette out of curiosity since then but now they taste absolutely disgusting. I cant even stand the smell.

Definitely feeling more energy but its a slow process and will take a lot longer before my lungs get back to pre-cig days.

My e-cig glows orange just like a real cig "cherry" and most people have to look twice before they notice. If you want you don't have to exhale clouds of vapour - you just keep the vapour in, and your lungs will absorb the vapour so that there is no "tell-tale".

I sit my desk and every 30 minutes or so take a sneaky puff ... no more 5 minute smoke breaks every hour or so - the end-result is that I am more productive. An extra benefit.

I feel the pain for those who can't quit.

However, I hope that the increased price will keep more youngsters from starting an addictive habit.

Best of luck to those of you who decide that they no longer need tobacco in their life.

Originally posted by larphillips


I just love how they sell this crap to the public. First, they demonize smokers and smoking, filling the public with as much, if not more, disinformation and blatant lies about smoking and the so-called dangers of "second hand smoke." Then they treat American tobacco companies like money-filled pinatas. Then they institute a punishingly high tax that has its biggest effect on the poor. The non-smoking public has now been so indoctrinated that they can't wait to punish smokers with these taxes, with the attitude that "if they want to kill themselves, we might as well make some money off of it..." ironically, the same charges that were laid before the tobacco companies when the courts and the government started to loot their cash.

What all of these idiots who vote to approve these taxes don't see is that they've created a system that is absolutely dependent on a steady and large stream of tobacco tax revinue. That monster needs to be fed and fed often... and its hungry. Every jerk-off who casts their ballot in favor of these "sin taxes" thinking "I don't smoke, so it won't affect me" lack the basic insight to fathom the big picture. Greed is gonna kill smoking faster than cancer ever will. You can only tax smokers so much, until they reach a point that, no matter how much they enjoy a good smoke (and don't let all of that propoganda fool you... smokers DO enjoy it) that it just isn't worth it to buy a pack of cigarettes anymore. Everyone has their price and everyone has a line they just won't cross.

So what happens when that revenue stream dries up? What happens when the monster is no longer being fed? Does anyone really think that all of these happy shiney programs attached to tobacco tax money will be left hanging? Oh no... no, not one bit. No, the monster is going to look to feed elsewhere; and when it does, all of these fools who happily voted for the tobacco taxes are going to find that something THEY like to do is going to get bit eventually.

And I'm a non-smoker.



www.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Ironies in your post:

1. If you're poor, then why are you spending money feeding a habit like smoking and not using that to feed yourself or your family? If you have extra money left over after your bills are paid then you aren't poor.

2. If you're poor and you insist on smoking, and there's absolutely no argument for the fact that cigarettes are bad for you, then why should the rest of the nation have to foot the bill (universal health care) for YOUR health care when the need arises and you can't pay it?

[edit on 1-4-2009 by sos37]

reply to post by larphillips


Ok, I did some math.... aprox 22% of the US population smokes cigaretts
www.monkeysee.com...

so that is 40 million. Say they smoke a carton a month, conservative figure.... and if the price on a carton goes up 5 bucks that equals $200 million extra a month in tax revenue . $200 Million !! can you say "Black Budget" where in the heck is all that money going??? I used to smoke , been 2 years now and I feel better every day. Cigs are one of the most addictive drugs and dangerous drugs out there, everyone needs to quit.

Well, as soon as I have about $100 to spend on it I'll be sure to try the E-Cigs, it seems they have liquids that imitate popular cigarettes, like Camels.

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

You've obviously never had to get off of an elevator and take the stairs because of some woman's perfume burning your eyes and nose and taking your breath away.

I fully understand the argument you are making towards the tobacco companies and I agree. But as a smoker who doesn't drink I would much rather see this tax on alcohol than smokes. And don't tell me that alcohol isn't as dangerous. I have to go to a funeral tomorrow for my cousin who died and seriously injured 6 others(4 in his vehicle, 4 in the vehicle he hit head on, the small child in the other vehicle was unharmed thankfully) from driving drunk Saturday night. I don't recall at any time my smoking a pack of cigs killing or seriously injuring anyone. Maybe if it cost 7 bucks for a beer we wouldn't see as much drunk driving. My point is, if they are going to tax cigs this much why not spread it out to many things instead of just one or two things?

The only thing I see coming from this tax is the amount of tobacco company trucks being robbed.

Edit for spelling.

[edit on 1-4-2009 by Simon_Boudreaux]

Originally posted by sos37
Ironies in your post:

1. If you're poor, then why are you spending money feeding a habit like smoking and not using that to feed yourself or your family? If you have extra money left over after your bills are paid then you aren't poor.

2. If you're poor and you insist on smoking, and there's absolutely no argument for the fact that cigarettes are bad for you, then why should the rest of the nation have to foot the bill (universal health care) for YOUR health care when the need arises and you can't pay it?

[edit on 1-4-2009 by sos37]

Wow... that is one BS, elitist post if I've ever seen one. For starters, my definition of "poor" tends to be the US, working-poor flavor, not actual third-world poverty. Now, you feel in all of your infinite wisdom that you know better and that these people shouldn't have, or can't afford, some small thing that gives them a bit of pleasure in their lives? Unless you are their parent or their supreme being, you don't have a say in the matter. You can have all the opinions that you want, but you are in no position to judge. It's a small vice. Who are you to deny them that?

What "universal health care" are you talking about? Last time I checked, this was the United States and you, or no one else, is "footing the bill" to care for anyone. By your very own twisted and definitely not free-thinking-American logic, we better make sure that no one eats McDonalds (or any red meat for that matter), drinks a coke or a beer, munches on some Doritoes or a Snickers Bar, or enjoys any of life's little pleasures because, in your opinion, they're "bad for us." Well thank you Oh Learned One, because the unwashed masses are better off with your wisdom and guidence.

The Numbers just don't add up, this plan says it will raise 35 million over five years. Wrong, it will raise WAY WAY more. The state of Michigan, alone, raises nearly ONE BILLION in tax revenue from cigarette tax and claims it goes to schools and medicade/medicare. They just added more tax, and it should at least create more revenue than the state of Michigan, why don't thier numbers add up to more than Michigans yearly tax haul? Oh well, the government is always right, right?

Originally posted by sos37

Ironies in your post:

1. If you're poor, then why are you spending money feeding a habit like smoking and not using that to feed yourself or your family? If you have extra money left over after your bills are paid then you aren't poor.

2. If you're poor and you insist on smoking, and there's absolutely no argument for the fact that cigarettes are bad for you, then why should the rest of the nation have to foot the bill (universal health care) for YOUR health care when the need arises and you can't pay it?

[edit on 1-4-2009 by sos37]

Um, what universal health care? If I had health care, then I could get treatment for my smoking addiction. I've tried to quit on my own...many times. Never works. I hear that some medications help. But, I can't afford the dr. bill or the outrageous cost of the meds. So, I self-medicate. Cigarettes. I don't want to smoke. $400 a month for cigarettes or $1,500 for drs/meds? You do the math! That's why I smoke.

edited to say: Why don't they take all that tax money from cigs and create a first-rate, free stop-smoking program with doctors and meds? Save lives. I'd smoke to that (that was a joke, kind-of)

[edit on 1-4-2009 by Pamie]

The cigarette tax is very much a class issue. More poor and middle class people smoke than upper-middle or upper-class people, who have mostly quit (it used to be very popular to be a heavy smoker at prep school, but those days are gone).

The upper classes have always felt it was their duty to enlighten the masses as to what was, or was not, acceptable social behavior.

Shame on you, smokers, how can you ever hope to rise in the world when you indulge such a filthy habit? Since they can't send you to prison, as they'd like, the only other thing they can do is try to tax you out of house and home, and you'll have nobody else to blame but yourself when you get to the homeless shelter.

Incidentally, Barack Obama isn't a smoker anymore. He's an ex-smoker, and there's nobody worse than an ex-smoker when it comes to persecuting and generally tormenting those who are not suffering as they are. Just saying. . .

Oh get off your high horse and drop the "hero of the working man" crap. You know as well as I do that the first argument makes every bit of sense to anyone who is living paycheck to paycheck just to put food on the table. I was there once about 13 years ago and I know what it's like to give up the things you want for the good of the family.

It's a question of priorities. Do you put that "small thing that gives" yourself pleasure ahead of the needs of your family or do you put food on the table? Selfishness versus selflessness. It's a simple as hell concept that you're making overly complicated with an emotional response.

And who am I to judge? When your second hand smoke gets in my daughter's face and she has to breathe that crap, you bet it's my damn business! If you have the right to ruin my family's health with your bad habit then I have every right to tell you where you can and cannot take that bad habit. I don't care if you fill your lungs with slime and chemicals in private but don't you DARE to presume that you have every right to bring your poison out into the public and share it with the rest of us.

And as for universal health care? Wake up, bud. A majority electedObama into office and he's looking to radically revamp the health care system so that every middle class family pays for the working class even more than they do now. And you think a TAX is bad??? You haven't seen anything yet when the government is controlling the pursestrings on your healthcare - they'll start telling you what you can and cannot eat, what you can and cannot drink, what you can and cannot wear because THEY are now footing the bill for your health. Don't you get it? The government owns you at that point.

Pammie, if the government is responsible for paying for your healthcare, it's not a question of if you "could" get treatment, it's "when" you get treatment.

So we agree that smoking is dangerous and has lasting, damaging effects on the body, right? Over time those effects will most likely cause you to see a doctor more than a non-smoking individual. You may even need to be admitted to the hospital from time to time.

What do you think will happen if the government looks at your doctor visits versus your smoking habits and decides that it would be cheaper for them if you completed smoking rehab and they decided you WOULD do this or you forfeit your universal coverage or are fined?

Okay, so let's say you need the rehab anyway and you go along with it. Now let's say the government looks at your eating habits next and determines that you eat fast food too much. The effects of fast food on your body will cost them more in the long run versus a healthy eating lifestyle, so they tell you to bring down your BMI, your cholesterol, your blood pressure and keep it down or else.

What happens when they get to looking at your personal lifestyle and determine that's too hazardous for them to foot the bill? The car you drive is too fast. You hang out at bars way too much. You drink too much alcohol.

Now you may be shaking your head right now thinking that the government would never do this to you - but don't be too sure. The insurance companies already do this to you, before they will write you a policy and it's perfectly legal! What makes you think the government, with all their hands on the power buttons and controls, wouldn't do the exact same thing when THEY have control of the pursestrings that pay for YOUR health care?

Now I know this is a heated debate but I just wanted to step in and say that I think we can all discuss this without name calling and mudslinging...and big quotes yeesh people.

So please from here on civil discussion and disagreement please.

Smoke em if you got em folks.

spiderj

Originally posted by skeptic1
I know I felt abused yesterday afternoon when I went to buy cigarettes before the tax hike hit today and had to go to 4 different places before I found somewhere that hadn't applied the tax yet.

$40.00 for a carton. :shk:

Makes a person really, really consider quitting just to stick it to someone.

$40? Your lucky. I had to pay $52 yesterday. I always said I would quit if it hit $50 so I guess now is the time.

They don't let us smoke anywhere now and treat us like animals... but they love to tax us for it. I say to the goverment, "Make up your bloody minds! I don't care if you outlaw cigarettes or not... but take a stand!! Don't come out and say it is wrong, condemn us, and make it hard to smoke anywhere AND then have the audacity to tax us because as much as you hate us you don't want to lose all that money!!!"

Hypocrites is what they are mates... and greedy as heck.

reply to post by LordBaskettIV


I agree completely, the numbers are false and misleading. The government has no problem allocating 11.6 trillion dollars to criminal bankers yet can only offer less than 40 million over 5 years to sick kids. Thats only 8 million a year, less then they spend on toilette paper


[edit on 1-4-2009 by Shadowflux]