Cigarette Taxes are one thing but ELEVEN dollars a pack?!

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


i agree fully, I also wonder if it can set any precedent. For what I think will be the next thing the nanny state will go after Alcohol.

reply to post by rockymcgilicutty


Look at what's happening in Australia and elsewhere to get a rough idea of where we're headed. The removal of branding. That's right, non-descript looking packets virtually indistinguishable by brand. Only thing on the outside are pictures of diseased internal organs. An outright ban on smoking in public spaces, including outdoor spaces. The banning of smoking in vehicles where there is a child in the vehicle. Oh and then it's on to the home. Already officials can refuse to accept appointments if an occupant smokes. There has already been suggestions of making it illegal for parents to smoke around their children period, though how they would implement this I don't know. Probably your new xbox4000. God forbit you skin up, the anti-spliff drone will soon be hovering and the stazi on their way.

There was a guy here in the UK a while back, couple of years. Self employed builder. On his lunch break he's sitting in his van puffing away and no word of a lie, he receives a fine. What for I hear you ask. Smoking in the work place. I swear, you couldn't make it up.

Im just wondering what year we are actually in because it's obviouse it's not quite 1984. Maybe "82. God the music sucks.

There are alternatives to smoking, like vaporizing.

I'm not sure why people are still smoking these days. I was still socially smoking when drinking, but made the switch without a problem.

It's cheaper, and you can vape away inside businesses.

reply to post by threewisemonkeys

Sorry but evidence linking smoking with lung cancer is anecdotal at best.

Uh, no it isn't. The chemicals in cigarette smoke are carcinogenic. Actually, nearly all matter produces carcinogens when burned.



One significant issue is that while all these chemical compounds have been approved as additives to food, they were not tested by burning. Burning changes the properties of chemicals. More than 4,000 chemical compounds are created by burning a cigarette.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by boncho
It's been that way for years for Canadians... Not sure if it makes anyone smoke less though.

i can answer that one, NOPE. oh sure it makes people WANT to smoke less, but you are addicted, so cutting down is hard.

i WILL mention a nasty side effect of such high cigarette prices tho. something that should make those who see high prices of smokes as a good thing health wise/paying for health care. when prices are HIGH it is WORSE both for your health and the health care system. there are a few reasons for this. first off if you roll your own sometimes you end up smoking MORE of the nasty stuff. this is because of the amount of tobacco you use. sometimes you use more sometimes you use less (gets better with practice for getting at least constant). now i tried something awhile back. i took a fresh pack of smokes, broke them up one at a time made the tobacco loose, and re-rolled them. i did this after rolling for awhile, i was astounded, they were rather "loosely" packed, in comparison to both the ones i rolled and pre-rolled ones. this means i was smoking MORE tobacco by rolling them myself. but it IS far CHEAPER, and so many people WILL still do it. so it could be said "home rolled" cigarettes are WORSE for your health.

next in some areas people go to "native reserves" to get CHEAP smokes, (can even get them "under the counter" in some stores). now these smokes ARE NOT REGULATED. you can even get different grades of cigarettes. some are cheaper than others. now the difference is almost night and day. the more expensive ones are "harsher" than "real" store smokes. the "cheap" ones are REALLY harsh. now i smoked the more expensive ones for several months. i found myself coughing a lot and "flemming up" pretty bad, so i stopped and went back to "real" cigarettes, after awhile it went away. i found the same thing with home rolled ones but not near as bad. that rather makes me think all on it's own that "real" smokes are better for you tho they kill you in the pocket book instead.

then there is a co-worker i was friends with. her husband put her into massive debt and she ended up getting her wages (low wage retail job to begin with) garnished. so she started smoking the "really cheap" Indian smokes, as she was pretty broke. i had already been through my "Indian smoke" issues. i noticed that she really started hacking after a bit. i begged her to stop smoking them since i knew my experiences with the "better" ones. sadly she could barely afford those ones so there was no chance. several months later she ended up with COPD. within about a year she was DEAD. she should have quit you say? well they had a hard time getting her off of them when she could barely breath, it's called ADDICTION, and it's a VERY HARD one to beat. personally i BLAME her DEATH on the government and their "raising prices to get people to quit". she was fine until SHE WAS FORCED FINANCIALLY to smoke even worse cigarettes due to the price difference. it was scary how fast it happened.

still think artificially (taxed to hell) HIGH PRICED smokes are a good thing? that they are better for the health care system? even IF that money all actually went to the health care system i think that the cost of those smoking cheap smokes because they are poor or even just stingy would be more in the end then brought in.

no what high priced smokes does is to put the poor at greater risk as they try to find cheap smokes. cuts into things like healthy/enough food. guess what? addicts will buy SMOKES FIRST then worry about other things, that's part of addiction. increase crime as broke people will do almost ANYTHING to get their DRUG, as well as CAUSING criminal enterprises, that will sell cheap/fraudulent smokes. the only POSITIVE thing is it will give the GOVERNMENT MORE MONEY to spend on what they throw money at all the time, on the backs of people who are addicted to a drug. :shk:

don't have "native reserves" to get "cheap" smokes at? don't worry i'm sure that some enterprising criminal will start making some and probably passing them off as real smokes. nothing like the government making CRIME able to easily take place. just like prohibition and the "war on drugs", things that just make the criminal element cash.

reply to post by WaterBottle


Uh yes it is. Do you know what a risk factor is? I suggest you google it. The average white American male has a 1% chance of getting lung canger at some point in their life. The average white American male smoker has an 8% chance of getting lung cancer in their life time. 8% is not 100%. Or is your math bad also?

Let me spell it out for you in real terms. 92% of smokers will not get cancer. Get it? Now try and tell me smoking causes cancer.

Your spin would be 100 % of 8% of smokers contracted lung cancer. Smoking causes cancer. Its idiotic reasoning.

reply to post by threewisemonkeys


Smoking in the work place ? I like Phil Hartman's attitude on that in the first 2 min 30 secs of this clip.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000
They got the people addicted and they know quittin' ain't easy, so...CHA CHING! . The world will soon become a prison system. Cigarettes will be more valuable than gold.

Just a reality check to see if you really are addicted.

At that price, and with the economy in the dumps, I think it will make many people re evaluate their position on whether or not they should continue smoking.

here is some food for thought about the whole cigarette, high priced cigarette thing, esp in North America.

i have been living abroad for several months now. cigarettes ARE CHEAP here. ok for the people here maybe not so cheap but better than those of us in North America in comparison to wages, say about $1.35/pack, yeah almost 10 times less than back home for me.

now an interesting thing has happened since i ran out of smokes i brought with me (and had others who don't smoke bring). i had been smoking a pretty steady number of smokes a day for awhile (and always trying to cut down a bit). but once i started to smoke the cigarettes here i end up smoking TWO for every one i had from home. that seems to tell me that the smokes back in North America have ARTIFICIALLY raised amounts of NICOTINE added to them. we have all heard the "conspiracy theory's" about this i am sure. about evil big tobacco doing this to make us addicts. but this seems like PROOF to me. otherwise why would i suddenly need TWO cigarettes right after each other, AS SOON as i switched to LOCAL SMOKES?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Ah, cigarettes…
Two funny anecdotes about cigarettes, taxation, the US Government, hypocrisy and me sticking it to the man.

Story – one. Oh how the US Government loves to tax the # out of smokers and their evil ways. However, some will find in interesting to know that the US Government buys and hands out cigarettes as a cheap incentive for information in Iraq and Afghanistan to low level sources (street vendors and eyewitnesses type sources not serious ones with access) to get them talking and build relationships with the locals.

It is done through the auspices of a thing called Intelligence Contingency Funds. There are pallets and pallets of various brands available for request to units that conduct Force Protection Source Operations. I can state unequivocally that a good number of these are given to children (fairly young ones at that) who act as runners with information.

Story – two. I served an exchange with the SAS in England as a Special Forces Officer. I don’t think I met a Brit who didn’t smoke. Anyway, one of the more popular activities during my stay was the frequent trip I would take to the local (quite a drive actually) US AFB at which I could buy cigarettes at tax free prices. I don’t smoke cigarettes, tried it of course as all Soldiers have I would imagine – I just don’t care for the taste of it. However, I bet I purchased more cigarettes in my time in England than a lifetime smoker. God, I would leave with wads of cash and a list two legal pages long – I’d have a driver volunteer to take me in a van to load it all up. I didn’t mind saving my “mates” a few pounds and I do so love that I was sticking it to the man – albeit the UK man by helping them avoid their taxes.

Come to find out later that all along I would be accused of violating some kind of military rule against “resale” to the indigenous people (the actual words, like the citizens of England are some tribe in New Guinea ) . I am just lucky that there is evidently some kind of deference that assumed Field Grade Officers were above being required to sign the form after every purchase that indicated the regulation as a reminder.

I eventually set off some internal mechanism that resulted in a long sit down with an unpleasant Air Force Colonel about my “activity”. I feigned ignorance and then pointed out that his regulation actually was flawed since it prohibited "resale" which impled profit and stated I was simply running an errand for a friend (And I had a lot of friends). A technicality I benefited from thankfully.

Personally, I took to dipping when I was a young Ranger in 3rd Bat on my first assignment. One finds that he is a lot less likely to fall asleep on security with a rather large dip of Copenhagen in. That developed into a 10+ year addiction. I quickly broke my long addiction to Copenhagen after a large non-healing lesion appeared. However, as a dairy farmer (don’t tell Mrs. Golf) working outside all the time I do sneak a chaw of Redman from time to time. I suspect she knows anyway .

As for cigarettes, I don’t like eating in a restaurant with the smoke all around but respect that in Missouri still at least in my County establishments are still allowed to choose for themselves what manner of business they wish to have. Score one for business owners. I just ask to sit as far away as possible and avoid busy times. One of the things I like about the State actually it’s still sort of free. Funny thing about freedom, true freedom anyway is that it works against your desires sometimes. It’s there to protect everyone’s rights not just non-smokers.

Even though personally I don’t like it – doesn’t mean that the government needs to be involved in limiting it.

Someday the government are going to go for something that all the non-smokers who jumped up and down in victory enjoy and then they will get to reap what they have sown.

I expect there will be much wailing, gnashing of teeth and rending of clothes about how unfair it is...

reply to post by Golf66


Gotta love that stuff.

The Govt buys cigarettes by the pallet-full for you to give to children in foreign countries, but if you actually buy them from the govt, they want to bring you up on charges if you sell them to adults.

Lovely.

Thanks for the enlightenment about the workings of the federal govt.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Golf66

 

Gotta love that stuff.

The Govt buys cigarettes by the pallet-full for you to give to children in foreign countries, but if you actually buy them from the govt, they want to bring you up on charges if you sell them to adults.

Just to be clear as I explained to the rather unpleasant Air Force Colonel - I was not selling anything.

A friend (or friends in this particular instance in large numbers) would give me what the items cost in advance then I'd run to the store (since I was headed there anyway) and buy them. There was no profit; I did not purchase the items with my money then make a profit or resell them.

Much like if I gave you $5.00 to get me a number one from McDonalds if you were going out for lunch and returning to the office. (I think that is the exact example I gave him.)

All I can say is thank god for legal language sometimes...I was worried there for a bit till I realized his policy was worded poorly. I know that wasn't his intent in the policy the intent was to prevent people from allowing the local's to avoid their taxes by having US servicemen buy the cigarettes for them. I also advised him to find a better JAG Officer – sometimes I just don’t know when to give up.

I think they changed the policy and put limits on the volume of purchases sometime thereafter.

I don’t smoke, but they’re about $15-20 in a Australia. The vast majority of that is excise and tax. In Thailand they’re about 70baht or around $2.50A. They’ve significantly strengthened the laws for passengers bring tobacco into the country. Used to be a 200 cigarette limit. It’s now 50 per person. I suppose when you think about it, smokers are a great burden on the public health system, and it’s their choice to make that.

Originally posted by threewisemonkeys
reply to post by WaterBottle

 

Uh yes it is. Do you know what a risk factor is? I suggest you google it. The average white American male has a 1% chance of getting lung canger at some point in their life. The average white American male smoker has an 8% chance of getting lung cancer in their life time. 8% is not 100%. Or is your math bad also?

Let me spell it out for you in real terms. 92% of smokers will not get cancer. Get it? Now try and tell me smoking causes cancer.

Your spin would be 100 % of 8% of smokers contracted lung cancer. Smoking causes cancer. Its idiotic reasoning.

edit on 1-3-2013 by threewisemonkeys because: (no reason given)

Russian roulette is another game where the numbers are in your favor...you do that too? I really don't care one way or the other but my choice was to give myself that 7% advantage...I've never been too lucky playing the odds.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000



Hello Wrabbit...

Maybe peeps should try growing their own. Can it really be that hard to grow and cure a plant. Would not have all the nasty additives they put in them too...

Originally posted by boncho
It's been that way for years for Canadians... Not sure if it makes anyone smoke less though.

Yep, a pack costs about 11 to 12 bucks here. Then again it depends on where you go to buy them.

OH PLEASE! give me a break they don`t want people to quit smoking or they would just outlaw tobacco, they just want to make more money off of people`s addiction to tobacco.
If or when they can`t make enough revenue from tobacco because too many people stop using it they will just put massive tax increases on other legal addictive products.

It`s a slap in the face and an insult when they say that they are raising tobacco taxes to help people quit smoking.

Cigarette smuggling is common around here,people buy cigarettes in virigina for a few dollars a pack and take them to new york and sell them for 3-4 times that much. about once a week on the local news they repoort of another person caught by the state police with 10-15 thousand dollars worth of cigarettes in their van with new york plates heading back north and all the cigarettes have virginia tax stamps on the packs.

$11 is cheap. Elsewhere in the world it's the equivalent of $20. It will get there in the US eventually too.

But you don't have to pay $11 a pack. No one is forcing you too.

Originally posted by nomnom
There are alternatives to smoking, like vaporizing.

I'm not sure why people are still smoking these days. I was still socially smoking when drinking, but made the switch without a problem.

It's cheaper, and you can vape away inside businesses.

I smoked for 24 years. I was up to a pack a day a year ago. My husband and I found out about electronic cigarettes and proceeded to make the switch. It was still hard to do, not nearly as hard as cold turkey (couldn't do that) or with the supposed "stop smoking aids" (they never worked). I don't think it's just nicotine in cigarettes that we were addicted to.

Now the FDA, WHO and CDC want the e-cigs regulated (taxed) and possibly banned. I'm hoping for a ban because I'll still be able to get them. People in Malaysia and other countries where it's banned still manage. Big Tobacco companies are already putting their grubby, greedy mitts in the mix by buying up the more popular e-cig companies. Possibly to close them down or to be a recognized brand if the FDA doesn't ban it all together. They'll be poised to continue their pocket picking, the gov't will continue to get their money and we'll continue to buy things that are slowly poisoned so that they can keep us hooked.

But as long as I can buy nicotine liquid from a company NOT associated with big tobacco companies I'll be happy. Hopefully I can continue to reduce the level of nicotine in my e-cig and get away from them completely before the gov't and big tobacco take it over.