When will they ever learn...

[Flick James]

Recent news article about how people continue to start smoking in large numbers despite everything that is in place to discourage smoking, including scary ads, taxes, and prices of $6 a pack.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/08/14/greene.smoking.labels/index.html?iref=allsearch

It never ceases to amaze me how much people just don't understand that the more difficult you make something to obtain, the more valuable it becomes, and the more people will seek it. It's one of the most basic economic concepts around, yet it's sad how few people get it. It's the same reason why the war on drugs is unwinnable.

Sorry, I'm feeling frisky today. Let the political rants begin.

[HappyGilmore]

$6 a pack is obscene. I can get an 8 pack of Budweiser for the same price.

I don't smoke. Never got into it.

Too many other vices.

[dean]

Our dollar is better than the US at the moment, but our packs are about $15-$20 a pop, and it doesn't stop people from smoking [or at least, most of the people who smoke don't care]

That being said, recent research released here said the smoking rate is slowly declining.

[RCMerchant]

I smoke. 
I drink. 
I usta do lotsa drugs.
I don't have unprotected sex! 

Oh yeh....I don't have sex. 

[Mr. DS]

Dunno man, I think obesity will kill us as a race before smoking does.

[Jack]

The anti-smoking people are such a bunch of angry fanatics that they just come off as a bunch of self-righteous a-holes.  When people like that try to vilify something, it just makes it all the more attractive.  If they were to make a calm, reasonable argument and be sensitive to the people they're talking to, well, you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

[Rev. Powell]

I get what you're saying, Flick, but I don't think cigarettes are the right example to use.



Common sense says that if you raise the price of cigarettes some people will decide they've had enough and quit.  Studies back that up.

You say that people are continuing to smoke in large numbers, but we're all aware that in the 1960s, about half of all Americans smoked, and now, only 20% do. 

It's true you won't be able to totally wipe out smoking with tax increases and other policies like warning labels, education, advertising bans, but you certainly can decrease it.  Nearly everyone (except addicted smokers and ideological libertarians) thinks that's a good thing.

By the way, look at the proposed new warning labels for cigarettes:



Of course, none of this really effects me because I'm on the e-cigarrettes. 

[Skull]

Recent news article about how people continue to start smoking in large numbers despite everything that is in place to discourage smoking, including scary ads, taxes, and prices of $6 a pack.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/08/14/greene.smoking.labels/index.html?iref=allsearch

It never ceases to amaze me how much people just don't understand that the more difficult you make something to obtain, the more valuable it becomes, and the more people will seek it. It's one of the most basic economic concepts around, yet it's sad how few people get it. It's the same reason why the war on drugs is unwinnable.

Sorry, I'm feeling frisky today. Let the political rants begin.

Love to rant but I dont feel frisky today.

Speaking of scare adds, Sunday night I was watching The Unholy Three (1930) and there was a part in the beginning of the movie showing a strongman lifting weights, then the mother said to her child "You could be strong as that man if you dont start smoking" that was 1930's!

the most expensive baseball card is Honus Wagner... Why? In 1909, Wagner prevented his image from being used on tobacco cards produced in later years, hoping not to encourage kids to smoke. But a few were printed.

Smoking is not good... Thats old news... :)

[Flick James]

I get what you're saying, Flick, but I don't think cigarettes are the right example to use.



Common sense says that if you raise the price of cigarettes some people will decide they've had enough and quit.  Studies back that up.

You say that people are continuing to smoke in large numbers, but we're all aware that in the 1960s, about half of all Americans smoked, and now, only 20% do. 

It's true you won't be able to totally wipe out smoking with tax increases and other policies like warning labels, education, advertising bans, but you certainly can decrease it.  Nearly everyone (except addicted smokers and ideological libertarians) thinks that's a good thing.

By the way, look at the proposed new warning labels for cigarettes:



Of course, none of this really effects me because I'm on the e-cigarrettes. 

I always respect your posts, Rev., and I understand what you're saying. Despite the overzealousness of my intial post, I don't doubt there are fewer smokers than in the 50's. My primary point, and as the article points out, is that despite the best efforts of government to curtail smoking by forcing scary warnings and applying steep excise taxes, there are still plenty of people who have no problem paying what's required to smoke. Besides, I don't believe for a moment that the goverment ever expects to curtail smoking to very low numbers. It's an addictive substance, and any addictive substance is a great revenue generator.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that they charge heavy excise taxes on cigarettes. It's better than making them illegal and forcing the money out of non-smokers' taxes to enforce it. I think they should also decriminalize all drugs, tax the s**t out of the users, and leave the non-users out of it. Just like in Portugal where they decriminalized drugs and almost immediately saw a drop in use. So, your point there is well taken. But I also know that there will continue to be plenty of smokers who will pony up the cash for a substance as addictive as tobacco.

[The Burgomaster]

I'm not a smoker, but I guess if people enjoy it $6.00 a pack may be a reasonable price to pay for relaxation.  Sort of like when I go to a casino to gamble.  I consider any losses to be the cost of entertainment.  It's up to me to determine whether the amount of fun I had is equal to or greater than the amount of money I paid.  Same goes for drinking, buying tickets to sporting events, taking vacations, or whatever.  My idea of a "good value" may not be the same as someone else's.  If I pay $10.00 to go to the theater and see a movie, someone who isn't a big movie fan might say it's a better value to spend only $6.00 on a pack of cigarettes.

[Flick James]

I'm not a smoker, but I guess if people enjoy it $6.00 a pack may be a reasonable price to pay for relaxation.  Sort of like when I go to a casino to gamble.  I consider any losses to be the cost of entertainment.  It's up to me to determine whether the amount of fun I had is equal to or greater than the amount of money I paid.  Same goes for drinking, buying tickets to sporting events, taking vacations, or whatever.  My idea of a "good value" may not be the same as someone else's.  If I pay $10.00 to go to the theater and see a movie, someone who isn't a big movie fan might say it's a better value to spend only $6.00 on a pack of cigarettes.

Hmmm. People using their own judgement to determine what constitutes value. What a novel concept.

Please take that as my sarcastic way of agreeing with you entirely.

[The Burgomaster]

I'm not a smoker, but I guess if people enjoy it $6.00 a pack may be a reasonable price to pay for relaxation.  Sort of like when I go to a casino to gamble.  I consider any losses to be the cost of entertainment.  It's up to me to determine whether the amount of fun I had is equal to or greater than the amount of money I paid.  Same goes for drinking, buying tickets to sporting events, taking vacations, or whatever.  My idea of a "good value" may not be the same as someone else's.  If I pay $10.00 to go to the theater and see a movie, someone who isn't a big movie fan might say it's a better value to spend only $6.00 on a pack of cigarettes.

Hmmm. People using their own judgement to determine what constitutes value. What a novel concept.

Please take that as my sarcastic way of agreeing with you entirely.

You truly are "the most interesting man in the world."

[bob]

Peer pressure is a hell of a thing. That's why I did it in high school.

[indianasmith]

All I know is, I hate cigarettes with a passion!  We live with my 83 year old Mother in law, and she smokes a pack a day.  The stench is all through our house. DESTROY THEM ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Mofo Rising]

I detest a lot about the anti-smoking movement. I hate things like The Truth for its faux political activism. I think laws banning smoking in bars are needlessly restrictive, and that decision should be left up to the owners rather than the government.

However, I also think that public education about smoking is better than ever. Smoking is a really stupid thing to do. It will shorten your life and it is almost guaranteed to kill you. It surprises me these days when I see kids smoking. Didn't you see all those warnings not to start? Have you talked to a single adult who is happy about smoking?

But I also think those who choose to smoke don't need the castigation. Sure it's bad for you, so is eating bacon. Quality of life over quantity.

For the record, I smoke. But only when I drink. In my sober day I have absolutely no desire to smoke a cigarette. Look at it this way, tax it all you want, but is it the role of government to keep me from making a bad decision?