Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467
I FUCKING PAY TAXES TO PARTAKE IN THIS..... YOU USE MY TAXES IN ONE FORM OR ANOTHER..... YET YOU WISH TO TAKE MY RIGHTS AWAY FROM ME????
AGAIN, YOU AND THE GOVERNMENT STOP TAXING THIS PRODUCT AND I'LL STOP SMOKING IN HIGHLY VENTILATED SMOKING SECTIONS OF RESTAURANTS. REFUND THE TAX MONEY THAT WAS USED TO BUILD PLACES LIKE JACOBS FIELD AND THE "Q" AND I'LL STOP SMOKING IN THOSE PLACES....
|
first, you might take note i'm not a huge anti-public smoking nazi. however, is this question an isolated question, or part of a larger fiscal reform? for instance, if we're playing house here, i'd rather reduce (not remove entirely, but drastically reduce the taxes on cigarettes...its freaking robbery as it is) the taxes on smokes, legalize/decriminalize marajuana, and tax that.
in my little licensing scenario above, i also think it makes sense that the bar owner might charge a very small membership fee to gain entrance to the bar. (in lieu of the taxes on smokes. charge people extra to actually smoke in public, but not to purchase the cigarettes themselves) the reason i say this is that it already happens in sc, only its "private club" memberships on saturday nights to get around blue laws. it's something like $1 at the door, or an annual membership of $50 or so, but it pays for the special license some bars have to stay open late on saturday nights. everyone wins. some bars don't get the license, and they close at 1 or 2 am. some bars get the license, and they stay open all night. another side affect of these things is that the people who smoke get to be around poeple who either smoke or don't care about it, and those who don't smoke don't have to worry about it.
edit: the other thing i was going to say is that
pan is making a great case for what happens when you threaten to take away a smoker's smokes