I don’t smoke, but I am outraged over the new federal cigarette taxes! The lines will be wide open this Saturday and I hope to hear from you as I take on this controversial subject. The last 15 minutes I will be joined by Jennifer Grisgby from the American Majority. I think you will be amazed about what they do!
Saturday 9-10 AM central time AM 690 out of New Orleans or on your computer here.
The show is live and your comments and questions are needed!
(504)260-0690 or 888-880-WIST
e-mail me gretaperry at gmail.com
Twitter @kissmygumbo
Please support my wonderful show sponsors:
Janie Mizes, my fabulous Real Estate Agent of MLS Realty in Mandeville jmizes@bellsouth.net (504) 430-2653 and Atmosphere Movers for all your moving needs in and out of the greater New Orleans area!
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=f3650c91-26a1-4eb9-9460-c2823eae542e)
I think it’ll be a great show!
I am outraged!
Why can’t we just tax tofu for once?
Only because this seems to be topical (and not because anyone was dropping any hints to check out your blog or anything 😛 ) I’ll share a nugget of wisdom about cigarette taxes that came up elsewhere.
Tax increases on cigarettes cost more money in the longrun than they generate. Cutting taxes on smoking has a pro-revenue effect.
It follows simply; when you raise taxes on cigarettes you discourage smoking. When you discourage smoking you lose revenue. Furthermore, people who quit smoking live longer. The longer they live, the more they draw in social security. In contrast, when you cut taxes on smoking, you promote smoking. When more people smoke, it creates more jobs in the tobacco industry. More jobs in the tobacco industry provides more income taxes. Furthermore, smokers don’t live as long, and so do not draw as much from the system in social security (though most will live full working lives and so pay in). Lung cancer kills very quickly, and so is not as expensive to treat as other conditions whose onset is associated with advanced aging. In the end, it is more revenue efficient to allow those who choose to smoke to carry on with their habit devoid of the burden of heavier taxes.
What really upsets me (a non smoker) is when they justify taxes on cigarettes by saying the revenue will go to pay for some other expense, like a bigger entitlement for health care, knowing that increasing taxes on cigarettes will make it more expensive, and therefore harder for poor people to afford them, thus will cut down on smoking, and reduce the revenue, so they won’t have enough for the new entitlement that was supposed to be funded by cigarette taxes, but it is now an entitlement, so it must be funded by taxes on something else.
Smoker’s opinion…
First, you’ve got to love it when people don’t take into consideration that the people who came up with this increase took into consideration themselves that there would be a decrease in smokers.
Second… the decrease you both mention in smoking would lead to a decrease in conditions such as lung cancer, high Cholesterol, and high BP to name a few. Conditions that surely “tax” our healthcare system.
As for the poor, two things…
1) If the groups that are currently speaking up for the poor concerning this tax increase did so for the fact that those same poor are missing meals, I might think of taking them seriously. Not speaking of you two… but rather these fronts popping up under the guise of some “Fair Taxation” group.
2) If someone is living below or near the poverty line and dropping even $2 a day on smokes, then they are fools who need to reset their priorities. No doubt they are the same people who opt for the 42″ LCD at their local “Rent-a-Center” rather than a more modest set that will meet their needs.
Taxes on tobacco meet little resistance because we ALL know that smoking is a foolish thing to do to oneself.
Nobody has to pay the tobacco tax; it’s voluntary. Don’t buy cigarettes and you won’t have to pay the tax.