Why should the poor pay for middle class kids' healthcare insurance?

Question

The SCHIP expansion is going to be funded by a cigarette tax. Not only is this a regressive tax because it takes a higher percentage from lower income people, its also regressive because lower income people are more likely to smoke.

"Smoking prevalence was higher among adults living below the poverty level (32.3 percent) than those living at or above the poverty level (23.5 percent)."
http://www.oralcancerfoundation.org/tobacco/demographics_tobacco.htm


So why do the Democrats want to make the poor poorer in the name of helping poor kids (who really aren't poor but rather middle class, because SCHIP will cover families who make up to $83,000 a year)?

Why is it that anyone opposed to this obvious sham is called heartless or uncaring? Do the math, and if you still think robbing the poor to pay the middle is "compassion" explain this to me, because it escapes my sense of logic.

"Stop Smoking" is that the best the left can come up with?

RIP Free will - you've been replaced because the government knows whats best for everyone

"Nobody's forcing anybody to smoke"

No, we're just forcing you to quit!

"And most middle class citizens don't make $83,000 a year. It's more like $34,000."

So, are you telling me that SCHIP is actually to pay for RICH kids healthcare? Rob the poor to pay the rich? Isn't that what Dems accuse the Reps of?

I can't wait to see alcohol prices go up 30% to stop all you drunks from ruining your livers, families, and careers. Oh wait, they won't do it because that affects a majority of the population.

Answer 1

Nobody's forcing anybody to smoke. If some people feel that the smoking tax is too much, then they can quit their nasty habit and save their money. Not only that, but smoking's bad for you, anyway.

Answer 2

you're oversimplifying and misstating the proposals that are at the instant on the table... a million) the present suggestion is to improve the present wellbeing plan that maximum federal workers at the instant have, to be available to all electorate instead no longer a replace on your present day assurance. 2) the present gadget is ruled by some super wellbeing care assurance companies, which has dissolved opposition over the years and bred collusion between companies to force up fees. 3) The Federal plan expenditures decrease than maximum deepest plans, and nationwide participation might in user-friendly terms force that value decrease, and tension deepest assurance to compete. 4) reducing unpaid wellbeing facility expenditures and unpaid expenditures for non-emergency emergency room visits will critically decrease the cost. those unpaid expenditures get handed directly to those who're fortunate sufficient to have assurance, so perfect now you already do pay for others and at an more desirable fee than you could. to no longer point out preventative screening would be extra exceptionally available, combating previous due prognosis of curable ailments, and hundreds of lives plus billions of greenbacks would be saved each year.

Answer 3

I think they should stop taxing smokers and begin taxing people who have the nasty habit of catching venereal diseases and spreading it to others within our population. Everyone has a glitch or a weakness, I feel it is very unfair to target one specific group of the population. For the people who want to call smokers such horrid people, I think you should take a long hard look in the mirror, because if you look hard enough I'm sure you will find your not such an angel yourself, and when all the people who smoke do quit the government is going to have to find another way to tax people to death. When are people going to realize that this campaign has nothing to do with morals or health issues. It has to do with stealing peoples money and taking away yet another freedom. Alchohol will be next, Its a well known fact chronic alchoholics are abusive and drunk drivers put peoples lives at risk. So every one who drinks should pay 300 xs the price for 1 drink than they do right now. One thing I have failed to mention is that alchohol will probably never be touched because most government officials know they would be taxing themselves! Its a big crock of B.S is what it is! Wake up idiots!

Answer 4

If someone has money to waste on a filthy habit in the first place they should pay for it. Perhaps this voluntary tax (no body is forcing anyone to buy cigarettes), if high enough will force people to break the habit and allow them to improve their health. That improvement alone could save countless thousands of dollars for that one person alone. First for their own self in not having to buy the cigarettes and for the tax payer or insurance company who would pay many times less in medical costs saved by reducing or eliminating conditions and diseases caused or aggrivated by smoking tobacco products. Savings to insurance companies could be used to help further educate those who are in the very income level you cite to encourage them to stop smoking and improve their health thus improving their life.

Your charge that Democrats this or that is pure BS the facts are there and party affiliation has nothing to do with it. If anything at all the Democrats want people to be healthy. That is all people.

Since smoking is optional and no one is forcing anyone to do it those poor people who don't want to pay for the middle class kids coverage can stop smoking and then they won't have to do that. By ceasing smoking they would help their own health too and save themselves the money they burn up by engaging in smoking. So your argument doesn't hold water.

Answer 5

Well the middle class pays for the poor classes health care now.

Answer 6

Why is it the Rich and the middle class of us have to pay for the welfare, food stamps, health care, housing and educations of the poor?

I say each for his own. Take of you and yours, and if you volunteer to contribute to the poor then contribute.

Answer 7

Hi,
I'm so amazed that the pot speaks! We've been paying and paying and paying, and might I add PAYING for the lower class (poor) fo so long now that it would be great if they'd get off their lazy welfare receiving butts to work so they can pay for their own butts for once. I have no pitty for people that aren't motivated by anything other than walking down to get their welfare checks from the hey I'm too lazy to get a job office. I hate your attitudes that the working world owes you something for breathing. Hey if you want to use up the Earths oxygen supply, then at least work for it. Yes, that means you might have to work two or three jobs like the rest of us middle class.

Answer 8

You've elected to not mention that smoking is a choice, and that is why it is taxed so much. And most middle class citizens don't make $83,000 a year. It's more like $34,000.

Answer 9

Great post. This would also cause middle income that do have insurance to drop it so they could get their children on the government issued healtcare. Why pay for your own when the government will give it too you for free.

Answer 10

Health care costs due to smoking costs everyone in the long run. Would you rather they raise income tax? Just can't make anyone happy anymore....

Answer 11

I see nothing wrong with taxing the smokers, I am a ex smoker who has smoked for 14 years and just recently quit since here in Canada cigs prices are up to 10$. It will have cause more people to quit and benifit the sick.