And fund the war with their profits rather than illegal drug trade?
2007-10-04 08:32:01 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
well, let's see, they already pay the farmers for growing the tobacco and tax the people for distributing it and buying it so I would say no. Why would they want to pay all those executives that would drain their profits on other people's work. And are you saying they fund the war with the illegal drug trade or that they fund the illegal drug trade. Guess it just goes to show the condition of education in our country.
2007-10-04 08:38:56 · answer #1 · answered by anothersomeonenew 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Obviously being asked and answered by people who do not understand addiction.
The government has already taken over the tobacco industry.
The pharmaceutical companies will be the only winners, however, as people switch to anti-depressants which might not be any safer.
People will still die of cancer.
And no, Liberals, pay for your own healthcare, and get out of everyone else's pockets.
2007-10-04 09:01:21 · answer #2 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Let's see, non-smokers want to tax cigarettes (including republicans who claim to be against taxes). This just more of the same. It's tax the other guys thing, not mine. Why not take over the airline industry and fund the war?
2007-10-04 08:49:28 · answer #3 · answered by Zardoz 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Smoking many times gets you once you have populated. it fairly is the tobacco foyer and the elected representatives of the tobacco states. The states that have numerous tobacco growers experience that their economy could crash if the growers switched to soybeans or different nutrition vegetation that could desire to truly be valuable to humanity. So extremely of subsidizing them to strengthen nutrition vegetation they subsidize them to strengthen tobacco. and make valuable even with all the warnings and such tobacco products have that it maintains to be accessible and eye-catching as they finished nicely comprehend the addictiveness of the product and that the present shoppers will probable stay hooked and pay even with all the state and federal taxes linked.
2016-11-07 06:30:00 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yep that would end tobacco use in the US.
They way government handles all the other programs it would be over in no time as far as making a profit.
In short order we be tax to keep it going.
2007-10-04 08:46:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They can't. The government has already been taken over by the tobacco Industry. Why do you think it's still legal?
2007-10-04 08:35:08 · answer #6 · answered by it's me 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, because then it would be unpatriotic to be a non smoker. If the government were making all the money, we would have smoking lessons in school and public service announcements extolling its virtues.
2007-10-04 08:43:45 · answer #7 · answered by maryjellerson 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Frankly I think government should tax the HELL out of tabacco and pay for health care with it. I am talking like $20+ a pack, it would produce tons of taxes and reduce costs when all the redneck smokers quit.
As far as the war goes, no amount of money will fix that situation.
2007-10-04 08:35:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Oh God, not another conspiracy theory...someone shoot me now.
Did you really just suggest that the government is funding the war by using the illegal drug trade???
2007-10-04 08:35:16 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
NO.
And Endive, who exactly smokes? Generally its the poor folks.
So you are trying to tax the poor more, shame on you....
2007-10-04 08:52:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋