a lot of revenue is collected from tax on cigs and tabacco can the goverment afford us giving up smoking? why are tabacco companies allowed to put chemicals in to make people more addicted to smoking?
2006-12-03 19:31:53 · 23 answers · asked by fraz.s.u.s.s 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
No. If everyone stopped smoking, they would have to place substantial tax increases on us all. Those of us that smoke, have to pay huge increases in the tax on cigarrettes every year. Can you imagine the amount of tax increases that would have to be placed on everyone, to recover the lost revenue? With that, plus other tax increases,council tax, road tax,etc, the burden of tax on people would be virtually impossible to cope with.Those that choose not to smoke,constantly moan about smokers,how would they feel with such huge increases in tax, to pay for those who no longer smoke I wonder???? I suspect they would moan about that as well!!!!!
2006-12-04 01:39:15 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, the gov do not want us to pack in the dreaded weed. One the one hand, smoking leads to serious health problems which are thought to be a burden on the NHS. On the other hand, the revenues raised from the sale of tobacco is approx three times the cost of running the NHS. A crazy situation really. If we lose the tobacco revenue, where else are we to get this wonga?
2006-12-03 19:58:10 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The government wants a happy medium I'm sure. The government and politicans receive a ton of contributions from big tobacco and their lobbyists in addition to tax revenue from tobacco sales. However the government ends up spending billions in taking care of people who end up with different types of cancer caused by tobacco. Plus the tobacco industry is huge and is a large player in the economy of the US including the farmers who make a living growing it all the way up to the highest levels of the corp. So in a way theres really no right or easy answer to the tobacco dilemma
2006-12-03 19:42:28 · answer #3 · answered by pintoguinness37 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Simple; because the gov gets $$$ for it.
First of all, you have to realize the gov does not care about us. Fed and State taxes raise prices on smokes, then they are free to do what they will with that money. It's unofficially called a Sin-Tax.
The less educated always vote to hike taxes on smokes because they don't, so hey, free money right? What people fail to see is the government taxing what they say is bad for us, so it sets a dangerous precident. I always said fast food was next, and just recently, Nevada had a proposal on the table to throw extra tax on soda pop. Where will it end?
Roe v Wade said it's okay for women to kill unborn babies because a woman has a right to do what they want with their bodies. Why then is it that they tax cigarettes, but they fund abortions for those that can't afford them?
FYI, the answer to 99% of every question is always, MONEY.
2006-12-03 19:38:26 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Asian countries in particular are the billion dollar targets of western tobacco companies; and vast emerging markets in China, India, Middle East are 200% ready to welcome smoking on a scale like never before. Dwindling markets in the US and Europe are replaced by Asia-MidEast. International events like F1 are vehicles to popularize smoking because many of the countries do not ban cigarette ads like in Europe.
Most Asian governments - with the exception of Singapore - do not have the moral commitment and courage to enforce stringent laws banning smoking. The revenues from "sin tax" is much too lucrative to be harsh on giant tobacco companies. Unfortunately for non-smoking citizens, there is only one Singapore... where enforcement is the best there is in the world.
2006-12-03 20:09:14 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
But at the same time, don't the smokers who become seriously ill from smoking cost the government heaps in health care? I know that the Australian government is serious about quitting. Smoking has been banned in all public areas in Queensland and Victoria, with plenty more planning to follow suite, there are now new rotating warnings on packets and anti smoking, government funded, ad campaigns on a variety of media.
2006-12-03 19:40:08 · answer #6 · answered by Pango 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The uk goverment does not want people to quite the weed if people stoped smoking they would tax us on something else they should have places 4 people to go that want to stop smoking like they do with the drunks
2006-12-03 19:45:35 · answer #7 · answered by hounslow m 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It costs the goverment a lot of money in health care because of people with smoking related diseases. That is one of the reasons the smoking ban came in in Ireland.
2006-12-03 22:34:39 · answer #8 · answered by gb512 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think it's really a moot point b/c of the fact that it'll never happen and people will always smoke. even if they, and saying "they" is such a general term, do want people to quit smoking, i'm sure they're smart enough to realize it's an impossibility. it's not just an american thing, it's a world wide thing. big tobacco has enough money to get the best lawyers.
2006-12-03 19:35:57 · answer #9 · answered by Yee Haw 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The government is currently anti-smoking due to the health costs invovled... afterall, treating lung cancer is not cheap, and the government absorbs alot of healthcare costs despite us being capitalist state.
And Nicotine itself was not approved by the FDA until 1984, that's when they first allowed Nicotine gums to the market to help people quit. It was never approved by the FDA for additives into drugs other than to help people quit smoking.
ps: nicotine is naturally occuring in tobacco plants
2006-12-03 19:38:48 · answer #10 · answered by antsam999 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋