Help me understand....

[BarryVT]

I recently read that snuff(smokeless tobacco) has been illegal to sell in Australia since 1991. Seriously? As well as cigars I am an avid copenhagen user. This makes no sense at all, ok to smoke cigarettes but no snuff? Hell thats if you can afford 35 to 40 a pack! Dont even get me started on plain packaging. Who the hell is the Einstein making all of the decisions over there. My granddaughter has more common sense. When people use tobacco, whatever it may be, they know and assume all risks involved. Plain packaging is not a deterrent.  I can see where outrageous taxes can be though. I thank God every day I live in Texas, very little taxation, snuff/cigarettes are 5 to 6 dollars each. A simple warning label on all tobacco products should be sufficient. And if they are plain packing cigars for the "youth," how many kids do you see walking around smoking cigars? Ok Im done venting!

[Corylax18]

40 minutes ago, BarryVT said:

I can see where outrageous taxes can be though. I thank God every day I live in Texas, very little taxation, snuff/cigarettes are 5 to 6 dollars each. 

Do you not realize that about $2.75 of that cost IS TAXES? I don't think 45-65% qualifies as "very little" taxes, we've just been desensitized.

It costs less than $1 for a tobacco company to get a pack of cigarettes to the gas station for sale. Texas taxes each pack $1.41, plus .35$ ish sales tax, plus the federal tax of $1.0066 per pack. 

As a point of reference recreational marijuana is taxed at 60% here in Colorado and there is a lawsuit working its way through the state courts (with a great chance of winning) arguing that that tax rate is unconstitutional. There is no legal justification for the state to be earning more profits than the businesses are. Especially considering the tens or hundreds of millions spent over the preceding decades prosecuting marijuana crimes.

It's obviously a very slippery slope, but I don't know how Australia got so bad. I'm not an expert on Australian law, but I would think the same legal argument would apply there. How does the government justify being the largest profit earner from something they have worked tirelessly to criminalize? 

It's as close to organized crime as you can get, if its not there already. 

[aphexafx]

@Corylax18 Cheers, well said.

[MD Puffer]

1 hour ago, BarryVT said:

Plain packaging is not a deterrent.  I can see where outrageous taxes can be though. 

 

That's the point.  

[BarryVT]

Economics tells me that they will reach a point of profit maximization, once they reach the top of the bell, any additional tax will result in loss of profit. Guess not there yet.

[KGM]

With those kinds of taxes, you'd think they could afford to pay my health care. 

/runs away

[Derboesekoenig]

Can't keep up with inflation. What is interesting though, is that Australia's national debt is 350 some odd $Billion. The U.S. is what, $25 trillion? The U.S. Treasury is borrowing $1 trillion for a SECOND year in a row just to finance the deficit. This absolutely blows my mind.

The last time the U.S. was completely out of debt? Andrew Jackson. And do you know what happened then? They tried to kill him after he spoke out against the Banks. The result eventually setup the Federal Reserve and the abolishment of the gold standard. In my mind, freedom no longer existed after that point. The beginning of the end. 

At what point does modern civilization cease to exist and implode in on itself? This cycle is impossible to maintain. Maybe not in any of our lifetimes, but possibly in the next 2 or 3 generations. 

 

[El Presidente]

“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.” 
― Groucho Marx

[Shelby07]

 

16 hours ago, El Presidente said:

“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.” 
― Groucho Marx

“Politics is the art of looking around for problems, not finding any, passing laws to fix them, raising taxes to finance the fix and explaining why the other side failed to resolve them.”

      -Shelby07

[Akela3rd]

 

“Politics is the art of looking around for problems, not finding any, passing laws to fix them, raising taxes to finance the fix and explaining why the other side failed to resolve them.”

      -Shelby07

V good. You should go into politics.

Sent from my ActionMan walkie-talkie

[mgcrunch]

I'm in an tough position. As a healthcare professional, I agree with higher taxes on cigarettes, snuff, etc. These products are directly related to a high healthcare cost and I don't have an issue with taxes on them, provided they are intended for prevention, cessation, and treatment. In the case of the ACA (Obamacare), some of the revenue from the increased cigarette tax went to fund CHIP (kids healthcare plan), which is great.   

That said, I hate to see DC taxes on cigars go up and fear situations like Minnesota where the out-the-door cost of cigars is nearly twice the retail cost. So I like the idea, but don't want to suffer the consequences. Terrible, I know. (And I end up getting most of my cigars from our host, so am relatively insulated.) 

That said, you'll see programs with the intention to direct revenues to the prevention/cessation/treatment fail hard. See Illinois video gambling. https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2018/12/6/18050680/video-game-addiction-gaming-disorder-who

Higher taxes on products aren't always a good answer, but I think there is potential in the idea. 

[Colt45]

47 minutes ago, mgcrunch said:

These products are directly related to a high healthcare cost....

Why not just ban tobacco products altogether?

Cash money...$$$

I think I'd be more than happy if "health care" was liberated from insurance companies.

[Corylax18]

4 minutes ago, Colt45 said:

I think I'd be more than happy if "health care" was liberated from insurance companies.

Preach. The Drug Companies too. Tobacco is bad for us, but Heroine? That shits great, so great our "healthcare system" offers it in about 15-20 flavors. Where are the astronomical taxes on these "medicines" dedicated to preventing and remedying the MASSIVE harm they've caused the country? 

[Fuzz]

1 hour ago, mgcrunch said:

I'm in an tough position. As a healthcare professional, I agree with higher taxes on cigarettes, snuff, etc. These products are directly related to a high healthcare cost and I don't have an issue with taxes on them, provided they are intended for prevention, cessation, and treatment. In the case of the ACA (Obamacare), some of the revenue from the increased cigarette tax went to fund CHIP (kids healthcare plan), which is great.   

That said, I hate to see DC taxes on cigars go up and fear situations like Minnesota where the out-the-door cost of cigars is nearly twice the retail cost. So I like the idea, but don't want to suffer the consequences. Terrible, I know. (And I end up getting most of my cigars from our host, so am relatively insulated.) 

That said, you'll see programs with the intention to direct revenues to the prevention/cessation/treatment fail hard. See Illinois video gambling. https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2018/12/6/18050680/video-game-addiction-gaming-disorder-who

Higher taxes on products aren't always a good answer, but I think there is potential in the idea. 

So would you be in favour of a sugar tax? Increased taxes on alcohol?

Don't get me wrong, here. I'm not nitpicking, I actually would like your honest opinion, considering that the two items I listed above also have impacts on healthcare costs too (and in the case of alcohol, social impacts too).

What about gambling? At what point do we say, "Anything bad for you will now be taxed for your own good"? I really don't want to be eating some bland food (albeit healthy food) for the rest of my life.

[Fugu]

On 1/29/2019 at 10:17 PM, Corylax18 said:

How does the government justify being the largest profit earner from something they have worked tirelessly to criminalize?

Well, it's all fed into health care.

[Fugu]

2 hours ago, mgcrunch said:

...I agree with higher taxes on cigarettes, snuff, etc. These products are directly related to a high healthcare cost [...]

So, is this really so? I often wonder. Never seen a thorough eval on it. Where and what are the true cost drivers?

A heavy cigarette smoker dying early on stroke, infarction or lung cancer may save the system a lot of money compared to the elderly autoimmune-disorder non-smoking vegetarian with monthly biologica treatment in the thousands, or the physically 'fit' but demented senior needing years of intensive care during its final stages of life. May sound cynical, yes, but most public health systems are cynical. Bear with me, an honest question to those in the know.

[gweilgi]

On 2/1/2019 at 9:28 AM, BirdDog said:

Besides the loss in tax revenue the are many reasons an outright ban or prohibition is problematic. There is an optimum amount of regulation for anything but it’s unfortunate that governments almost always overshoot that level. 

The more something is regulated the larger the black market is for that product. Just look at alcohol prohibition (and marijuana?) and the issue caused by outright bans on anything. 

Case in point in Australia: the unholy combination of a ban on drugs with an ineffective interdiction of said drugs and high taxation on alcohol.  We are now at a point where when a person wants to party hard and has $50 in their pocket to do so, it is a rational economic choice to buy three pills of ecstasy -- enough for an entire weekend -- rather than one bottle of hard liquor (let alone wine or beer) which may see them through Friday night but will leave them dry for Saturday and Sunday.  

[PigFish]

On 1/29/2019 at 1:17 PM, Corylax18 said:

As a point of reference recreational marijuana is taxed at 60% here in Colorado and there is a lawsuit working its way through the state courts (with a great chance of winning) arguing that that tax rate is unconstitutional. There is no legal justification for the state to be earning more profits than the businesses are. Especially considering the tens or hundreds of millions spent over the preceding decades prosecuting marijuana crimes.

Dude that is kinda' funny!

Welcome to the administrative state, the 4th branch of government.

Ever wonder what a fuel producer makes on a gallon of gas? It is a few cents! That's right. The government(s), through state, local and federal taxes, then of course there are sales taxes to boot make the lions share of profits. In the people's republic of California, the state excise tax is 58.2 cts/gal, plus the feds, 18.4 cts., and then it double dips the state/local sales taxes, lets call that 9% at 3 bucks a gallon for another 27 cents...

I hear these lefty hacks complaining about 'big oil' and no one makes a bigger killing than 'big government.'

Rant over!

I hope the dopers win... and we can have us some trickle down freedom!!! They won't!

-The Pig