why sould the poor have to give up , you don't think that there is already too much inequities in this country
2007-05-27 07:47:07
·
answer #1
·
answered by ddddddd d 4
·
4⤊
1⤋
So are you saying that poor people who are addicted to cigarettes should either pay more than they can rightly afford - which is near enough the way it is now - for tobacco, or be forced to SUFFER cold turkey? And then, are you going on to say that it's all okay though, because the rich smokers will still pay to smoke and contribute to taxation?
In other words, are you saying that the poor should suffer because they're poor? I'm sorry, but what an utterly evil thing to suggest.
You say you don't smoke, so you obviously don't realise just how addictive smoking is. Giving up smoking is a painful experience. Being FORCED to give up smoking would be excruciating - and something you cannot comprehend.
Do you eat meat? How would you act if I wanted meat to be illegal? (For what it's worth, our Government has already formulated a plan which would turn all of us into vegans.)
But here's another point: how do you think the Government will recoup the loss in revenue if all the poor smokers quit? There are a hell of a lot more poor people in this country than there are wealthy people, so do you believe that Government will just sit back and think, "Neat - we've lost taxes, but we're saving millions that would otherwise be spent on the NHS"? Sorry, but it doesn't work like that: taxes go up, they don't stay the same or go down. If millions quit smoking, you WILL pay more taxes to make up for the deficit simply because Government would normally want to spend that money on other projects. They will still want to spend that money on other projects. Oh, taxes may not openly increase, but new stealth taxes will be introduced. And we will ALL suffer.
Capitalism doesn't deal with equilibrium - capitalism ALWAYS demands more. That's why we have poor people.
2007-05-27 10:51:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by Simon D 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Wonder if you'd think it a good idea if I suggested the same thing for Alcohol and Petrol. The poor could then give up even more things and the rich would be able to enjoy a night out in less crowded pubs. They could then get in their fancy gas-guzzling cars (who cares if they've had a bit too much as long as the government get the revenue from the extra pint!) light up a Cigarette (more revenue) and speed off down the road, (even more revenue) without a care in the world. If the poor just happen to be out walking to while away a few hours boredom and get hit by a speeding car that won't matter either, will it! They aren't keeping the government in business so the tax-payers will be glad to get rid of yet another 'sponger'
2007-05-27 08:09:15
·
answer #3
·
answered by willowGSD 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Higher prices may mean more smuggling I do agree with that.
I have a great idea that I'm surprised is never mentioned:
every year up the legal smoking age by one year.
So next January you have to be 17 to buy cigs, Jan 2009 you have to be 18, 2010 you have to be 19, 2011 you have to be 20 etc etc. You would see a lot less school kids smoking if this were done. There would be no more "but I'm 16 honestly officer" from the 13 year olds.
=> People would say "it's not fair, I should be allowed to choose" - but as taxpayers we don't choose to pay millions on their treatments do we?
2007-05-27 07:54:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I have several friends and coworkers that smoke.
What I have observed and several studies prove this out is that there is a higher percentage of poor and lower middle class people that smoke than upper middle class and rich people.
Raising taxes on cigarettes literally takes money out of the pockets of the poor.
Most smokers are addicted and have a hard time quitting so they keep paying more and more money that they can not afford to loose.
Do I believe that people should stop smoking? Yes
But you can not force someone to stop by raising taxes.
Addictions are extremely hard to break and it takes time to do so.
If you don't believe me ask the next smoker you meet if they have attempted to stop smoking and how many times.
2007-05-27 08:43:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by joseph s 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
They tried this in Boston a number of years ago and it started a revolution. Leave the smokers a lone, they pay taxes and get no representation that's not fair. And what is this "the taxes will still be paid to the government" stuff. If you think the government doesn't waste enough money then why don't you send them some extra with your income tax return (if you pay taxes).
2007-05-27 07:49:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by RomeoMike 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
i have to agree with you. smoking has absolutely no good advantage to the people who do it nor the people who don't. i find it very weird too that poor people still smoke, when they barely have enough money to continue living. if they had stopped smoking, they might be able to save extra money for the daily things. they either aren't educated or they are educated but they aren't prudent enough for their long term best result. so, yep, i think gov should double the price and gain tax only from the rich. even if the smokers don't stop, at least it wouldn't attract new smokers as much as it would if the price wasn't raised.
2007-05-30 19:43:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by hohoduck 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I disagree, but very good point. It makes as much sense as taxing the crap out of the rich. I was always thought a flat tax was the only fair tax, not a flat rate, a flat amount. I don't suggest a flat tax, but I'm not under the delusion that taking more of someones money because I want it to go to someone else is fair.
2016-03-13 00:29:31
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
You'd be creating the biggest black market since Prohibition kiddo! Simple solutions sound good, but they seldom solve the problem. Besides, it's an addiction, and that's not an easy thing to give up. The price of gas has more than doubled and people don't seem to be driving any less. Get the point?
2007-05-27 08:18:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by texasjewboy12 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
Their no poor in this country. If people on benefits are hard up they have their priorities wrong I.E smoking drinking etc which seems to come before home and family.Now I suppose some one is going to come on here and say the have to have a bit enjoyment.If you want enjoyment get a job.
2007-05-27 08:41:29
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Higher prices mean more smuggling, so there's a limit to how much one country can put up tax on cigarettes.
2007-05-27 07:50:00
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋