Do you think raising the tax on cigarettes for good causes is a good idea?

Question

While I agree it would likely reduce the purchase of cigarettes (in direct proportion to the size of the tax), i don't think its a good idea for 2 reasons:

1. I don't like government intervening and/or trying to influence what people should do (i hate smoking, but I hate social engineering even more. I think people can make their own good or bad decisions).

2. This would seem to hurt small business owners more than anyone. Consider, you are raising the price on a product they sell a lot of yet NONE of the increase in price goes to them. Raising prices will lower sales, so essentially you are decreasing revenues to the small business owner who sells cigarettes. Any tax set up to hurt small business owners is very poor in my view.

Agree/Disagree? Why?

That is a great point made about the sales being inelastic. If indeed they could raised the tax double and have nearly insignificant amounts of losses than truly you are only having the smokers pay. However, I would need to see a stuffy on just how inelastic smoking sales truly are before being convinced.

That is a great point made about the sales being inelastic. If indeed they could raise the tax and have nearly insignificant amounts of losses in sales than truly you are only having the smokers pay.

However, I would need to see a study on just how inelastic smoking sales truly are before being convinced.

Answer 1

Everybody complains about paying taxes, I mean federal, state, sales. But, they could put a 300% tax on cigarettes and alcohol and it would not even slow down 98% of the those that consume them. So I say jack that tax up, and lower the taxes coming out of my paycheck. I'd say that's a pretty good cause.

Answer 2

It's a good idea in the sense that it is easy to raise "sin" taxes because the people being taxed engage in what is increasingly a socially deviant practice.

It hurts small business owners for the sake of tax revenue and perhaps social engineering. But all taxes hurt small business owners. Furthermore, cigarettes are a relatively inelastic good... people will keep buying them as long as the price is reasonable. In that respect it mostly hurts the smokers.

Answer 3

I think they should jack the prices WAY WAY WAY up. I remember about 5 years ago the prices was only 5.25 then they jacked em up to 7 - 8.00 they should jack em up even more to like 15.00. You know how rich those b@stards are going to be if they do that???? It'll be cheaper too if the government made stop smoking classes when they jack the prices up or better yet, ship all the smokers to an island and blow the island up with the "weapons of mass destruction" that Iran is making. LoL

Answer 4

Given the damaging effects of direct smoke and second hand smoke, it's more than fair, particularly if it can help fund smoking cessation programs and health treatment for infants, etc. (If you want to fight big government and social engineering, vote NO on any number of gay marriage ban proposals -- that's the government dictating who you can and cannot marry)

The "small business" argument gets tossed around too for drinking ages, and the final analysis shows it rarely affects them as harshly as they say. If clients can't smoke up a dining area, they can go outside.

Answer 5

Hun I want to know why you want to tax a minority to pay for the majority Raising taxes on cigarettes is just penalizing a minority to benefit the majority is that fair If they want to raise a tax that more people will be paying in to there slush funds going to health funding then they should enforce a Alcohol in which more people will be paying in to Besides there are a lot of diseases That relate to the abuse of Alcohol that cost as much or more than cigarettes
thank you
Robecca

Answer 6

raising tax on cigarettes is a good idea but not a great one, there should be a better way.. dont look at it just as the government intervening. the companies that makes the cigarettes spend millions of dollars a year to have their lobbyists in Washington influence the votes of the representatives on capital hill through campaign contributions and money..

Answer 7

It's a good idea. Ciggarettes shouldn't even be legal in the first place. It was probably one of those things like alcohol -- too many people were using them and it became too hard to enforce.

And it is funny how people like robecca_san try to bring minorities into it. People who smoke shouldn't be smoking in the first place. No one is forcing them to smoke. If the government decided to raise the prices, they have the free choice not to buy ciggarrettes anymore. It's really sad how people like her try twist the facts and cry discrimination against minorities.

Answer 8

I too don't like government intervention and, as of late the public will whine about second hand smoke to segregating those who choose to smoke to outright banishment.

Meanwhile all this does is allow our government to posture that it gives a flying rat's behind about protecting our health for the sole purpose of lining its coffers.

Answer 9

Yes they should. You have to think about state health care. all of these people who are being diagnosed with cancer from smoking and the state has to pay for treatment. I think they should have to pick up some of the tab don't you. I smoked for 11 years. (have been smoke free for 5 weeks yea for me)

Answer 10

No it really only hurts the poor people, because if one is going to smoke they are going to smoke any ways and if they are addicted they are probably going to smoke therefor robbing peter to pay paul