Home > Archive > Multiple sclerosis support > June 2005 > Re: OT -- AMA weighs in on 'sin taxes!'he AMA should just come out and say that





You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

Author Re: OT -- AMA weighs in on 'sin taxes!'he AMA should just come out and say that
rose

2005-06-30, 11:50 am

CW wrote:
> As the states and the Federal Government are finding out, sin taxes do
> decrease sin - e.g., the huge boost in tobacco taxes did not yield the
> expected revenues because people did smoke less.


or at least they stop buying pre-rolled cigarettes! here in california,
the humongous 'sin tax' on tobacco only applies to ready-made cigars
and cigarettes, so anyone who wants to smoke and isnt' too lazy to roll
their own can still do so comparatively cheaply -- $15 - $20 for a bag
of tobacco, couple bucks for rolling papers, ayy vi-ola, you've got
yourself a carton of smokes you didn't have to pay $60 for!!

and, as you note, the state is still broke -- they were counting on all
that extra money while simultaneously preaching the virtues of
non-smoking. california has the highest percentage of non-smokers of
any U.S. state, so of course the 'sin tax' passed easily. people who
say they're against higher taxes often really mean they're against
higher taxes that they have to pay THEMSELVES. i'm not sure i like the
idea of one segment of the population voting to tax a different
segment, even though i know smoking is very bad.

african-americans have higher rates of certain diseases, such as
diabetes, than white americans. i wonder who would sponsor raising
taxes on afro sheen and black radiance cosmetics, in order to fund
diabetes research? (nobody would, because it would be too
inflammatory.)

> However, the AMA should
> just come out and maintain that taxing alcohol heavily will decrease
> consumption and hence, alcohol-related conditions.


but the A.M.A. wants the money to be used to fund alcohol research and
alcohol abuse treatment programs. in order to fund the research and
treatment, they're most likely COUNTING on people drinking heavily.

i wish they'd use their extra revenues more wisely. in california we've
been treated to anti-youth-smoking teevee commercials as part of the
cigarette tax funds distribution, and every single one has revolved
around peer pressure. in so-cal, there really IS no peer pressure to
smoke cigarettes -- truly. teenagers who smoke meth and regularly
climb in and out of K-holes will turn up their noses at the sight of a
cigarette. i've lived here more than 20 years, and i still haven't got
used to some of the tudes!!

rose

Copyright 2003 - 2008 pahealthsystems.com