<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Tobacco and the Flat Tax</title>
	<link>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/</link>
	<description>Independent thinking about  California Politics, Hot Bikini Clad Teachers (Erica Chevillar), Topless Teachers (Tamara Hoover), Hot French Newscaster Melissa Theuriau, Katie Rees  &#038; the LA Times</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 22:04:03 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Insider</title>
		<link>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/#comment-2422</link>
		<author>Insider</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2005 16:23:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/#comment-2422</guid>
		<description>I could not agree more with the personal responsibility argument however to me smoking has always been a special case because of the significant social costs involved. Since a good percentage of the costs associated  with smoking are external to the person making the personal decision, I've felt that the taxes:

a) partially (and perhaps completely) offset the external costs.
b) reduced the extent of the external costs by the reduction in cigarettes smoked due to the higher cost.

Admittedly neither of these arguments is fool proof but they have been strong enough for me to alwasy support increasing the taxes on cigarettes while allowing people to make the personal decision on whether or not they want to smoke--as long as they don't do it around me.

As for how the tobacco settlement you bring up a good though I think different point. I'd be interested to knowing how the settlement money was really spent and the reasoning behind it. If you have that data or are interested in writing about it feel free to email us here and we'll look at putting it up. 

Finally, as far as your "Big Mac" analogy, it's a good argument and there are certainly social costs with that as well...medicaid, etc. My hope on that one is to see more of the costs associated with people living unhealthy lifestyles (like morbid obesity) bear more of the costs associated with that (the same way smokers often pay higher medical insurance). To me, it makes all the sense in the world that people who eat unhealthily would pay more for that decision. 

Of course, I can just hear it now, "obesity is a disease, it's not their fault, low income people don't have time/money to eat healthy food." I'm sorry I don't buy any of these arguments. I've seen too many people of size eating super-sized chili cheese fries when other things were on the menu to move the blame away from the individual (or the parents in the case of juvinal obesity).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I could not agree more with the personal responsibility argument however to me smoking has always been a special case because of the significant social costs involved. Since a good percentage of the costs associated  with smoking are external to the person making the personal decision, I&#8217;ve felt that the taxes:</p>
<p>a) partially (and perhaps completely) offset the external costs.<br />
b) reduced the extent of the external costs by the reduction in cigarettes smoked due to the higher cost.</p>
<p>Admittedly neither of these arguments is fool proof but they have been strong enough for me to alwasy support increasing the taxes on cigarettes while allowing people to make the personal decision on whether or not they want to smoke&#8211;as long as they don&#8217;t do it around me.</p>
<p>As for how the tobacco settlement you bring up a good though I think different point. I&#8217;d be interested to knowing how the settlement money was really spent and the reasoning behind it. If you have that data or are interested in writing about it feel free to email us here and we&#8217;ll look at putting it up. </p>
<p>Finally, as far as your &#8220;Big Mac&#8221; analogy, it&#8217;s a good argument and there are certainly social costs with that as well&#8230;medicaid, etc. My hope on that one is to see more of the costs associated with people living unhealthy lifestyles (like morbid obesity) bear more of the costs associated with that (the same way smokers often pay higher medical insurance). To me, it makes all the sense in the world that people who eat unhealthily would pay more for that decision. </p>
<p>Of course, I can just hear it now, &#8220;obesity is a disease, it&#8217;s not their fault, low income people don&#8217;t have time/money to eat healthy food.&#8221; I&#8217;m sorry I don&#8217;t buy any of these arguments. I&#8217;ve seen too many people of size eating super-sized chili cheese fries when other things were on the menu to move the blame away from the individual (or the parents in the case of juvinal obesity).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bryan Kerwick</title>
		<link>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/#comment-2408</link>
		<author>Bryan Kerwick</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2005 02:26:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/#comment-2408</guid>
		<description>Anthony:

What ever happened to personal responsibility and freedom of choice?

Why isn't there a $2.00 tax on each Big Mac sold in this country when obesity and diabites are far worse than lung cancer?

Why buy into the government line of BS when every State with the exception of the poorest one being Mississippi spent the tobacco settlement money on everything else except what it was supposed to go to.

There are no people in this country that think smoking is harmless to their health yet they CHOOSE to smoke anyway just like you and me. It is illegal for the government to make me pay more for the services they provide everyone else that doesn't smoke.

If you want your children and grandchildren to grow up smoke free that is YOUR responsibility, not the governments nor mine. By the way, my son doesn't smoke because he CHOOSES not to.

The flat tax is the only fair way to treat everyone equally. We need to wean the various governmental agencies off the cigarette tax money just as well as weaning America off foreign oil.

People need to take some personal responsibility and not expect the government to tell us what we can and can not do. That attitude of having Big Brother making my decisions for me is not FREEDOM at all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anthony:</p>
<p>What ever happened to personal responsibility and freedom of choice?</p>
<p>Why isn&#8217;t there a $2.00 tax on each Big Mac sold in this country when obesity and diabites are far worse than lung cancer?</p>
<p>Why buy into the government line of BS when every State with the exception of the poorest one being Mississippi spent the tobacco settlement money on everything else except what it was supposed to go to.</p>
<p>There are no people in this country that think smoking is harmless to their health yet they CHOOSE to smoke anyway just like you and me. It is illegal for the government to make me pay more for the services they provide everyone else that doesn&#8217;t smoke.</p>
<p>If you want your children and grandchildren to grow up smoke free that is YOUR responsibility, not the governments nor mine. By the way, my son doesn&#8217;t smoke because he CHOOSES not to.</p>
<p>The flat tax is the only fair way to treat everyone equally. We need to wean the various governmental agencies off the cigarette tax money just as well as weaning America off foreign oil.</p>
<p>People need to take some personal responsibility and not expect the government to tell us what we can and can not do. That attitude of having Big Brother making my decisions for me is not FREEDOM at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Moon</title>
		<link>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/#comment-2389</link>
		<author>Moon</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Aug 2005 14:10:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/#comment-2389</guid>
		<description>I fully plan to quit, eventually.  It's just getting too expensive to enjoy any more.  Call it a Flat Tax, a National Sales tax ( which could be different than the Flat Tax, or, it could be not. ), call it whatever you want, but, it would knock about $1.50 off of every pack and make cigarettes once again readily available to any teen and more enjoyable for those smoking now, thereby removing the financial incentive to quit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I fully plan to quit, eventually.  It&#8217;s just getting too expensive to enjoy any more.  Call it a Flat Tax, a National Sales tax ( which could be different than the Flat Tax, or, it could be not. ), call it whatever you want, but, it would knock about $1.50 off of every pack and make cigarettes once again readily available to any teen and more enjoyable for those smoking now, thereby removing the financial incentive to quit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Lebowski</title>
		<link>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/#comment-2386</link>
		<author>Jeff Lebowski</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Aug 2005 05:52:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/#comment-2386</guid>
		<description>The author seems frightened and disoriented.  Was this post written by Christian Irwin?  Did he really mean to say Flat Tax, which refers to Income taxes, or is he attacking the idea of a National Sales Tax?  Does he know the difference? God damn you Walter! You f**kn' asshole! Everything's a f**kin' travesty with you, man! And what was all that sh*t about Vietnam? What the F**K has anything got to do with Vietnam?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The author seems frightened and disoriented.  Was this post written by Christian Irwin?  Did he really mean to say Flat Tax, which refers to Income taxes, or is he attacking the idea of a National Sales Tax?  Does he know the difference? God damn you Walter! You f**kn&#8217; asshole! Everything&#8217;s a f**kin&#8217; travesty with you, man! And what was all that sh*t about Vietnam? What the F**K has anything got to do with Vietnam?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Insider</title>
		<link>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/#comment-2385</link>
		<author>Insider</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Aug 2005 05:47:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/#comment-2385</guid>
		<description>Great Posting Moon. As a libertarian, I don't particularly care if people smoke as long as I don't have to breath the air. As a new friend however I think you should quit. I know that there is nothing as annoying as a non-smoking preaching to a smoker, but...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great Posting Moon. As a libertarian, I don&#8217;t particularly care if people smoke as long as I don&#8217;t have to breath the air. As a new friend however I think you should quit. I know that there is nothing as annoying as a non-smoking preaching to a smoker, but&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Stevo in H-Town</title>
		<link>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/#comment-2383</link>
		<author>The Stevo in H-Town</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Aug 2005 02:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://independentsources.com/2005/08/27/flat-tax/#comment-2383</guid>
		<description>"But, my SOCIAL CONSCIENCE tells me that I don’t want the next generation smoking."

What does a Republican Really know 'bout that?!?!


Sincerely,

H.Clinton</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;But, my SOCIAL CONSCIENCE tells me that I don’t want the next generation smoking.&#8221;</p>
<p>What does a Republican Really know &#8217;bout that?!?!</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>H.Clinton</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.534 seconds -->
