Pigouvian Taxes on Porn & Cigarettes!

[amicus]

Federal Taxes on cigarettes will increase by over $6.00 per carton on April 1st, 2009. I went looking for a lawyer, a class action suit, someone who might represent a claim against the government...and found the following:

Pigovian taxes are named after economist Arthur Pigou who also developed the concept of economic externalities. William Baumol was instrumental in framing Pigou's work in modern economics.

A Pigovian tax (also spelled Pigouvian tax) is a tax levied on a market activity to correct the market outcome, if there are negative externalities associated with the market activity. In the presence of negative externalities, the social cost of a market activity would exceed the private cost of the activity. In such a case, the market outcome is not efficient, and the market would tend to over-supply the product. If a Pigovian tax equal to the negative externality is imposed, the market outcome would be reduced to the efficient amount.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23234.html

Proposed Taxes on Porn Both Unconstitutional and Bad Tax Policy
by Joseph Henchman

UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh explains why California's proposed 25% tax on pornography is likely unconstitutional:

Content-based taxes on the sale of First-Amendment-protected materials (and recall that the law targets not just unprotected and illegal obscenity, but also constitutionally protected pornography) are generally forbidden[....]

The government is taxing porn and tobacco because they do not wish the citizens to consume either.

This is a facet of the inevitable direction government will follow if allowed to meddle and interfere in the lives of the citizens.

Y'all should become anti tax and anti government folks real quick.

Amicus...

 

[Darkniciad]

This is the classic "And then they came for me."

There are plenty of people happy about the cigarette taxes. They won't be so happy when that well dries up and it's booze that's next to make up the shortfall. Then bottled water ( already happening in Chicago ), porn, gasoline, the internet...

Black cars.

It isn't even about "correcting behavior". It's all about finding something that they think they can sell as evil to a large enough percentage of the populace to successfully tax to outrageous amounts.

Your sin is coming. Better enjoy it while it lasts.

 

[Dragonlipz]

"Smoke 'em if ya got 'em!"

 

[sr71plt]

I think someone should try to figure out what health care for smokers and those made sick by smoke is costing and tax cigarettes to that limit. Let the cigarette smokers carry all of the burden. Tobacco is a carcinogenic drug. It's only historical circumstance that has made it a legal drug. Smokers who can't/won't stop are drug addicts. But that's just me.

 

[amicus]

Good points all, Darknclad, it is times like this I wish I were back doing a radio program, hell, I would start a revolution if I could pull it off.

And I truly think it will take a revolution to stop this.

Think I will polish some .50 cal shells tonight...

amicus...

 

[Guest]

Yep.

You polish your weapon, ami.

 

[sr71plt]

Think I will polish some .50 cal shells tonight...

amicus...

And go up to your shack in the woods and not bathe for six months and grow a straggly beard and mumble a lot.

 

[Guest]

And go up to your shack in the woods and not bathe for six months and grow a straggly beard and mumble a lot.

Laughing.

I was just thinking he was going to go jack off.

 

[sr71plt]

Laughing.

I was just thinking he was going to go jack off.

I see him as thinking he's too good for himself.

 

[slyc_willie]

The government is taxing porn and tobacco because they do not wish the citizens to consume either.

Sounds more like they're depending on the incurable fixations of addicts to subsidize yet more costly legislation.

If you'll excuse me, I'm going to light up and download some reality porn . . . .

 

[amicus]

Thas my man Slyc...at least we can agree on something...and be reminded from a poster above...that this is indeed a 'porn site', but do they have to drag the characters on this stage with such filthy thoughts and language?

Oh, well...I am here by choice, I guess...sleep with sluts and end up smelling like cheap perfume...such a deal...


ami

 

[slyc_willie]

Thas my man Slyc...at least we can agree on something...and be reminded from a poster above...that this is indeed a 'porn site', but do they have to drag the characters on this stage with such filthy thoughts and language?

Oh, well...I am here by choice, I guess...sleep with sluts and end up smelling like cheap perfume...such a deal...


ami

I'm sure we can always agree on something, Ami, regardless of our differences. That's why I like debating with you.

The hour's late. I may not respond on that other thread, so let me just wish you good night. Sleep well, Ami.

 

[oggbashan]

I think someone should try to figure out what health care for smokers and those made sick by smoke is costing and tax cigarettes to that limit. Let the cigarette smokers carry all of the burden. Tobacco is a carcinogenic drug. It's only historical circumstance that has made it a legal drug. Smokers who can't/won't stop are drug addicts. But that's just me.

In the UK the tax take from cigarettes and tobacco is at least three times the cost of health care associated with smoking. Some estimates put it as high as five or six times the health care costs.

If ALL the UK taxes from cigarettes and tobacco was given to health care and research it could increase the funding for research into all types of cancer 10 fold. But the government is far more addicted to the tax revenue than the nicotine addict. They set the tax high enough to raise the maximum amount of money but not so high as to deter the smoker (otherwise the government would lose revenue!).

Og

 

[Guest]

This is the classic "And then they came for me."

Your sin is coming. Better enjoy it while it lasts.

Since the total medical costs associated with obesity now equal or surpass the total costs associated with smoking (depending on which studies you read), the fat police will be knocking at our doors next.

How about a Big Mac for ten dollars? Anyone?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

The excesses will require bloodshed to remedy.

It's too bad, but it's not likely that the government, mega-corporations, or special interests will voluntarily curb their appetites for power or your purse. They'll go for it until you're an impoverished docile slave or you revolt.

 

[R. Richard]

It isn't even about "correcting behavior". It's all about finding something that they think they can sell as evil to a large enough percentage of the populace to successfully tax to outrageous amounts.

Your sin is coming. Better enjoy it while it lasts.

Ummm, OK, exactly how are they going to go about taxing pussy? TIA.

 

[Weird Harold]

Ummm, OK, exactly how are they going to go about taxing pussy? TIA.

I'd rather not speculate on that particular possibility -- they're going to come up with enough stupid ideas on their own without us giving them good ideas.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Not PUSSY, pussies!!!
Theyre easy to spot. One half of the population are PUSSIES and the rest are PUSSY.

I cant imagine any red-blooded American girl parting with a Dollar for government, so theyre forced to get it from the pussies.

 

[freshface]

I think someone should try to figure out what health care for smokers and those made sick by smoke is costing and tax cigarettes to that limit. Let the cigarette smokers carry all of the burden. Tobacco is a carcinogenic drug. It's only historical circumstance that has made it a legal drug. Smokers who can't/won't stop are drug addicts. But that's just me.

I read someplace (sorry, no citation) that the end of life care for a smoker is about equal to the extra years of Social Security and other benefits they would otherwise receive. I recall the point of the article being that it was a wash for them.

 

[sr71plt]

I read someplace (sorry, no citation) that the end of life care for a smoker is about equal to the extra years of Social Security and other benefits they would otherwise receive. I recall the point of the article being that it was a wash for them.

Ah, Darwinism in action?

On the whole, I would have preferred, I think, to get the added value of ten more years from my father rather than seeing him die painfully of tobacco-caused lung cancer at 68.

 

[trysail]

I think someone should try to figure out what health care for smokers and those made sick by smoke is costing and tax cigarettes to that limit. Let the cigarette smokers carry all of the burden...

FACTS ( but don't let them get in the way of fundamentalist religious beliefs ):

"Harvard Professor Kip Viscusi has repeatedly demonstrated that smokers already pay more in excise taxes than the social costs of their habits. Even before the Master Settlement Agreement, “excise taxes on cigarettes equal or exceed the medical care costs associated with smoking.” For example, Illinois’ cigarette taxes, according to Viscusi, were $0.13 more per pack than the social costs of smoking before the settlement added $0.40 to the price of a pack of cigarettes, before the $0.40 a pack tax hike approved by the state legislature in 2002, and before Cook County’s $0.82 a pack boost in 2004.

Instead of raising cigarette taxes, simple justice demands that cigarette taxes be reduced to zero. In fact, states should consider taping a dime or a quarter to every pack of cigarettes as a way of thanking smokers for reducing the burden on taxpayers!"


Source: http://www.heartland.org/suites/tobacco/

 

[sr71plt]

FACTS ( but don't let them get in the way of fundamentalist religious beliefs ):

"Harvard Professor Kip Viscusi has repeatedly demonstrated that smokers already pay more in excise taxes than the social costs of their habits. Even before the Master Settlement Agreement, “excise taxes on cigarettes equal or exceed the medical care costs associated with smoking.” For example, Illinois’ cigarette taxes, according to Viscusi, were $0.13 more per pack than the social costs of smoking before the settlement added $0.40 to the price of a pack of cigarettes, before the $0.40 a pack tax hike approved by the state legislature in 2002, and before Cook County’s $0.82 a pack boost in 2004.

Instead of raising cigarette taxes, simple justice demands that cigarette taxes be reduced to zero. In fact, states should consider taping a dime or a quarter to every pack of cigarettes as a way of thanking smokers for reducing the burden on taxpayers!"


Source: http://www.heartland.org/suites/tobacco/

Spoken like an addicted smoker.

Yes, I'm aware that most posters who respond to taxing tobacco threads are also addicted smokers.

But, what do fundamentalist religious beliefs have to do with any of this? (especially since I don't hold fundamentalist religious beliefs)?

 

[sr71plt]

If smokers weren't champion rationalizers, they wouldn't be smokers to begin with.

 

[harrlequin]

Spoken like an addicted smoker.

Yes, I'm aware that most posters who respond to taxing tobacco threads are also addicted smokers.

But, what do fundamentalist religious beliefs have to do with any of this? (especially since I don't hold fundamentalist religious beliefs)?

Non and ex-smokers can be fundamental pains in the asses. The "Moral Majority" even, looking down at us damned addicts and getting righteous all over us.

I am a smoker, I want to quit. I have tried to quit. Does the government give any of that tax money they've collected from me to help? Nope. Nada - even here in Canada. The gov is just as addicted to the smoker's taxes as we are to the nicotiene, like it or not.

 

[sr71plt]

Non and ex-smokers can be fundamental pains in the asses.

This goes both ways on this issue, doesn't it? Hardly a justification to label someone a religious fundamentalist for taking either view.