reply to post by N. Tesla
In the present discussion of cigarette smoking, we should remember that smoke is by far the most harmful way to deliver nicotine. A ban on smoking
should not be synonymous with banning nicotine. Society takes the wrong approach toward addictive substances. Total bans usually cause more harm
than good. Though they work if a super majority support them. For example alcohol in strict Muslim countries.
Rather than taking a moral stance, society should look at drugs(tobacco for this discussion) from the view to create the most good with the least
harm; cost vs. benefit. Users should pay the health and social costs of addiction. The taxes on a pack of cigarettes should pay the increased health
costs from smoking. As it is, nonsmokers subsidize smokers. On the other hand smokeless tobacco, particular Nitrosamine free forms, would have
almost no "health tax".
It should be possible for smokers to buy an inhaler delivery system that would give the quick deliver desired without the thousands of harmful
chemicals created in burning tobacco. This would allow a virtual ban on cigarettes. Rather than an outright ban, a health tax should be applied
A big part of the problem is that people haven't understood what the true drug crime is. It isn't using this or that substance. In most cases
this is some form of self medication.
THE TRUE DRUG CRIME IS PROFITING OFF HUMAN WEAKNESS!
This is true whether its the DEA selling confiscated property, the Royal family selling Opium in China, or the local Convenience Store profiting
off America's 3 addictions. Should we include gasoline and make it 4!
I should clarify that I mean economic profit, not a return. Any profit above the Fed Funds rate, should be taxed at a 100%. Actually, it should not
be taxed in the traditional sense as this encourages criminality in government. The excess profits should be distributed in a completely random
fashion to nonprofits or returned to purchasers.
If there is no taxation on a substance that is deemed harmful or addictive, the users will be the profiteers. Therefore, we should have a
social tax so that users would bear the cost. For example, Crack would be taxed at a high rate, powdered coc aine less, and Coca leaves
hardly more than Coffee. Distilled Spirits would be taxed at a higher rate than wine and beer. Drinks with a meal would be taxed at a lower rate
than when served alone in a bar.
Last of all, a great deal of Politicians time would be soaked up trying to decide whether the tax rate was correct!