Cigarettes, alcohol and taxes
Moms View Message Board: The Kitchen Table (Debating Board): Cigarettes, alcohol and taxes
I was watching the news earlier and it was reported that the governor of New Jersey's proposed budget includes a raise in the cigarette tax. The tax would go up 50 cents and with sales tax, a pack of brand-name cigarettes would cost over $4.00.
I hear over and over about raising the taxes on cigarettes, but never about raising taxes for alcohol. Why? Alcohol is a legal drug which causes medical ailments and, when used in excess and abused, endangers others. Why not raise the taxes and use some of that money to finance drug awareness, or combat drunk driving? Am I off base, or does it not seem right to target this industry and not the other? What do you think?
Actually, most states tax alcohol pretty highly. I know, because NJ's alcohol taxes are significantly less than Pennsylvania's, and liquor is much cheaper in NJ.
I understand what you are saying, and "sin" taxes are usually a less unpopular way of making money. However, with all the problems caused by alcohol, it is not addictive for most of the population, and only when abused does it actually make people sick or kill them. And, from recent articles I have read, red wine, in moderation (no more than two glasses a day) is actually medically beneficial to a lot of people.
Cigarettes, on the other hand, as I heard in a commercial recently, are deadly when used as intended. (and I am one who has tried hundreds of times over the last 20 years to quit smoking)
I rarely buy liquor, so I guess I didn't realize how heavily it is taxed. And the last time I was in a liquor store was 5 years ago. (Side note-The first time I was out of the state of PA and saw alcohol being sold in a convinence store, I thought the store was breaking the law! I've gotten around a little more since then.  ) I don't hear about alcohol taxes, and the only reason the rise in the cigarette tax stood out to me was because the news made a point of it.
I do think there is/are many more people addicted to alcohol, but they don't see it. Perhaps it's because I grew up with an alcoholic (who was NOT physically abusive, but emotionally distant) that I feel there is more use and abuse of alcohol than most people realize. I purposely stayed away from drinking for that reason, but others I know have not.
I don't mean to downplay the serious problems caused by alcohol abuse, in which I include the idiots who have two or three drinks and then get in the car. And I agree, there are probably a lot more people addicted to alchol than anyone is willing to recognize, because many alcohol abusers keep their use under control of sorts. My aunt, my dad's half-sister, was an alcoholic, so I got to see alcholism up close and personal myself, though my life was never directly affected by it.
Side note, I grew up in Illinois, where you can buy liquor in supermarkets, and the first time I went to a state store in Pennsylvania I felt sort of like saying "Joe sent me" - it really felt weird.
I grew up for the most part in Louisiana, and alcohol is on every corner. It is sold in drug stores, convenience stores, grocery stores, wholesale clubs, Walmart, and even drive-through daiquiri shops. I'm not a big drinker; if I have 3 or 4 drinks over a year, that's a lot for me. My mom, her brother, her parents (deceased), all of her aunts and uncles that I can recall....all alcoholics. My dad did his share of drinking too; although he was from Georgia and had to go to Atlanta to buy his liquor when we lived there, since Gainesville was in a *dry* county. Alcohol has definitely done its share of damage in my family.
I do know that depending on who is running for what politically around here, there are frequent moves to raise alcohol taxes. The problem is, with someone who is determined to drink, they don't care how much it costs...it's an addiction however you slice it.
BTW, I was surprised when, in my early 20's, I discovered you couldn't buy alcohol everywhere in other states, and that bars/lounges closed at 2 AM! They stay open all night here.
I personally think that raising the taxes on alcohol and cigarettes in ineffective. Where I live you pay over 6 dollars a pack for cigarettes and a carton (not sure of the exact price) but is probably around 60 dollars. The only way to combat things like alcoholism and cigarette smoking (if looking at the health issue) and the loss of life NOT to mention the cost of treating people who are chronic smokers and alchoholics.
The only way to combat drunk driving is to prohibit people from owning cars or from drinking in the first place. As long as people have cars and alcohol is available for consumption there will be drunk drivers and there will be people dead from it.
I personally feel that while cigarette smoking is slower it is just as awful. Not only does cigarette smoking kill the person it also makes the person exposed to it sick. I am ALL for a ban on smoking in public places and I sure wish they would put it into effect and stop pussy footing around everytime someone who smokes starts screaming about their right to smoke where they want to. Drunk driving is against the law because it kills well so does smoking.
I know this isn't exactly what you were talkign aobut but drunk driving kills alot of people. For example approximately 8 count them 8 teenagers/young people have died in my city ALONE this MONTH due to excessive speed combined with alcohol. Is raising taxes on alcohol going to prevent this no. I feel the government would pocket that money and say thanks so much for your contribution. EDUCATION will limit these sort of tragedies from occuring. Limiting exposure to alcohol. Preventing our youth from purchasing and consuming alcohol and driving will prevent these things.
Karen I CANNOT believe that you can purchase alcohol EVERYWHERE there and that bars are open all night  I think that is pretty sad (of course not reflecting on you) and definitely contributes to the problem of alcoholism therefore leading to death. It may not be immediate but death will follow.
It is very sad how many people today die due to accidents caused by the consumption of alcohol
Catherin, I agree with you about not inflicting my smoke on others, and scrupulously follow the laws about not smoking in public places, etc. And I don't smoke in non-smoking homes, even my dil's house.
And I agree about the harm alcoholism does. Both the personal emotional and developmental harm to the families of alcoholics, and the deaths from drunk driving. I am always very frustrated when a death caused by drunk driving results in a very low sentence. Some judges here are trying to force people with DUI convictions to have the device put on their cars that won't allow the car to start until the driver (a) breathes into the device and (b) measures a safe alcohol content. Some are protesting this kind of sentence as unconstitutional. Personally, I am in favor. (Our news radio station had a bit over the weekend about a town councilor who had an argument with someone who blocked his car in a bar parking lot. He called the police, who strongly suggested that he not drive because he appeared to be intoxicated. He said "do you know who I am", got in his car and drove, and was promptly arrested for DUI. Hooray!)
And I agree that taxes won't solve the problems, but at least the taxes will help pay for some of the financial costs, which is at least something.
Ginny dear I didn't personally mean you. Here in Canada there is a constant fight to have non smoking places and it seems to be a constant battle they seem to be on the verge of passing and the smokers protest and there goes the bylaw .
I am so happy that there they are trying to at least handle the repeat offenders somehow and that they guy got nailed with DUI! Here they are going to try to implement photo radars to discourage speeding (racing is a problem here and alcohol is generally involved) as I mentioned before 8 young lives in the last few weeks have been lost .
I do have to agree that at least taxes help pay for some of the costs but we as a society really need to do more.
On a personal note I cannot imagine how hard it is for you to stop smoking I was a smoker for 7-8 years and had a hard time quitting but I did it GOOD LUCK! dear
Catherin, this was my point, although I didn't make it well, that such easy access to alcohol contributes to the problem of alcoholism. Taxing alcohol or cigarettes isn't going to solve the problem.
As you said, "The only way to combat drunk driving is to prohibit people from owning cars or from drinking in the first place. As long as people have cars and alcohol is available for consumption there will be drunk drivers and there will be people dead from it." We know that's not going to happen though, is it? My youngest kids are 17 and 18; in the last 3 years, they have known 7 or 8 kids who were killed in car accidents where drinking was involved. What's wrong with this picture???
While I agree that education and limiting exposure to alcohol will help prevent some of the needless deaths, I think the key is PREVENTING kids from purchasing and drinking alcohol and driving. Our public school system starts in elementary school with drug/alcohol awareness programs. We have the DARE program, and various other programs throughout their school years. But I personally know of quite a few kids who have fake ID's. In Louisiana, at age 18 you can legally go into a bar. The legal drinking age, however, is 21. You can BE there legally, but you cannot be served alcohol unless you are 21. Ha! A lot of good that does. If you have an ID that says you are 21, more than likely you will be served. I put part of the blame on bar owners and convenience store clerks, who should, IMO, be able to spot a fake ID.
My mom is an alcoholic and has lung cancer. She smoked for almost 50 years, and drank longer. She quit smoking 4 years ago. She was just diagnosed with lung cancer in January. She has not had a drink since January. I don't know if she will remain alcohol free or not. She has suffered neurologic damage from her drinking. In my mind, she's a classic example of why cigarettes and alcohol aren't good for you. I used to smoke too; I quit before I had my kids, then started again a few years later, quit for a few years, smoked for a couple more years, and I quit a few years ago. I will NEVER smoke again. And I have to be honest, if the health aspect of it didn't discourage me from smoking, the cost certainly would! But everyone doesn't feel that way.
I am not naive enough to believe that my 18 y/o son has never drank before, but I constantly talk to my kids about alcohol and drugs, he does not have access to it at home, I will certainly NEVER supply him with any, and he is reminded every time he goes out in his vehicle, that if I find out he has had anything to drink, and has driven under the influence, I will not only take his keys, but will take his license as well.
I, too, agree that taxes could at least help pay for some of the cost of education/prevention, but education needs to start in the home, you cannot solely depend on someone else to educate your kids or whoever about *why* they shouldn't drink or smoke.
I couldn't agree more that education starts at home and I for one am glad that my children are learning at home the dangers of drinking, drinking and driving, drug use (not just the abuse but the use PERIOD) and why smoking is bad for you  )
I think it's sad that in our society it needs to be taught in the school because so many parents don't teach it
Catherin dear, I know you didn't mean me personally. And yes, smokers have protested here also. Some seem to think it is their Constitutional right to smoke. However, I agree with the people who warn about second hand smoke - I just wish I could be a successful former smoker. At present, in Philadelphia, all "public buildings" (buildings which the public enters for any reason) are non-smoking, except that office buildings sometimes can make an exception and allow a smoking room for tenants who rent an entire floor. Most cabs are nonsmoking also, and restaurants must have separate smoking and non-smoking sections with specific ventilation systems, and only if they are large enough so that the nonsmokers won't be exposed to second hand smoke.
In general, I agree with these rules. And, if I am outside and in a group where most are non-smokers, I either put my cigarette out or move away from the group. However, I do take issue with some cities that are thinking about making all public areas including the sidewalks and parks non-smoking.
I know that if I am ever blessed with grandchildren I certainly won't smoke around them and will have to do some special cleaning in my house before they come to visit.
I am always shocked for a moment when I go to another state and see people smoking in public buildings. Here in CA there is no smoking in any buildings-even bars!
I am against placing taxes on alcohol and cigarettes. Where does it end? Should we place a tax on fast food and use the money to educate people about the dangers of obesity? And what about televisions? Should we place a tax on those and educate people about the importance of exercising as opposed to sitting in front of a tv?
I think having these kinds of taxes is a slippery slope that I don't think we should be on.
Good point, Melanie, definitely something to thing about.
I think placing specific taxes on certain products is a form of discrimination in that they are designed to penalize a certain group of people in our society. I understand that the reason given is to help defray some of the costs of healthcare & other government expenses involved with these products, but as Melanie pointed out, where do you stop? How do you decide what the limit is for the cost to the government to where products should be individually taxed over & above the already high local & state sales taxes?
Also, if a smoker pays for private medical insurance to cover all of the costs should they become ill and is not a burden on society, why should they be taxed? They should be allowed to claim a tax credit on their income tax.
Well, it's not done for quite that reason. It is one of the justifications given, that (a) using liquor and tobacco adds health costs to the tax burden and, nowadays (b) both are unhealthy and higher taxes may discourage some, at least teenagers (who often have more discretionary income than I) from purchasing them.
IMHO, they do it because it is hard to get any legislator to publicly be in favor of cheaper alcohol and tobacco use. So they can get away with it. Same reason many cities and states put special taxes on hotels and rental cars - they know the users are probably not voters in their states, so they can get away with it.
And even taxes which are "non discriminatory" can have a discriminating effect. The Social Security bite is the same percentage whether you make $6 or $20 an hour, but the $6 an hour worker feels it more because they have so little to start with. And then there is the so called "marriage tax". I have mixed feelings about this, because I'm not sure, in the end, that the married couple winds up with less money than two single people, but that's another debate.
And the sales tax also hits the lower income person harder because they feel it more, even if it is the same percentage. One of the things I like about Pennsylvania is that most necessities are not subject to sales tax - supermarket food (not fast food, takeouts or restaurant food, and not soda, for example), most clothing (excluding "sports wear", furs, and other "luxury" clothing), over the counter medicines, prescription drugs and many basic paper goods, like toilet paper, are among that list. So I live with a 6% sales tax (7% in Philadelphia) because most of what I buy is not taxable.
An aside, as a smoker, I pay attention to cigarette prices, and I've discovered that WaWa carries a brand called USA, which is $16.99 a carton before sales tax, whereas name brands are anywhere from $24 to $27 a carton before sales tax. I wonder (lol) how much advertising costs and lobbying costs figure into this.
BTW, we still have a lower tax burden than most other nations, despite our cries about high taxes. (We also don't have as good a public school system or health care system or old age pension system as most of Western Europe.) And other countries tax a lot of things we don't - for example, in Great Britain, there is an annual tax on televisions and radios (which, I suppose, supports the BBC). And gasoline, mostly because of taxes, runs somewhere around $4-5 a gallon throughout most of Europe. I remember, way back in 1956, when we entertained some young men from England and Scotland who were amazed at our gasoline prices, because even then they paid $2-3 a gallon.
I have not read all the responses yet. So I appologize if I'm repeating something.
Cigarettes can kill only the person smoking them. Alcohol also slowly kills the person drinking. The difference? Alcohol impairs judgement. Alcohol does not just kill the drinker, but the people & families & children they hit while driving under the influence. Not to mention the effect it has on rising insurance costs due to damage volume of claims. Sure smoking can affect the people around you. They don't like it. Don't want to breath it. Fine, smoker goes outside. Problem sovled. A drunk who gets behind the wheel? The only place a drunk can go is to his couch or bed. Otherwise, he's risking more than his own life.
I think alcohol and smoking are two extreemly different things. One is socially acceptable (drinking), the other is not (smoking). Drinking is PC, as is being a non-smoker. Which is why smokers catch more flack and taxes than drinkers. Which isn't fair at all.
Don't forget if a smoker gets lung cancer, god forbid, and doesn't have insurance?
Who pays for the healthcare? Tax Payers.
Same with Liver Cirosis.
Same with Aids contracted from drug abuse and other drug related diseases.
I respectfully disagree with your using that as a negative towards smoking, or drinking for that matter. Tax payers end up paying for ANYONE who does not have health insurance when they become ill. Whether they smoke or or drink, or not.
Page, I am a smoker. Respectfully disagreeing, second hand smoke is very harmful to the people who live with or around the smoker. Children in households where there is a smoker have a higher incidence of asthma, colds, and bronchial infections. People who don't smoke but live with smokers are also at risk for lung cancer and other illnesses related to smoking.
I know all these facts, but continue to smoke. Why? Well, I am well and truly addicted and as much as I have tried, have not yet been able to break the addiction. And believe me, I have tried.
I think one reason alcohol abuse is not more socially unacceptable is that somehow it is a "man" thing to be able to "hold your liquor". And, for reasons I don't begin to understand, drinking has become more and more attractive to young people. I have read studies where something like 30-40% of college students admit to drinking (away from home) at age 13, and being drunk at least a couple of times by the time they are 15. And binge drinking at colleges is a major problem.
I remember discussions with teenagers 5 or 6 years ago, teaching Sunday School where girls who didn't particularly like to drink admitted going to parties and drinking (and their parents would have been horrified) because that was the only way to be popular - if you stayed away from parties where there was drinking you'd be staying away from the popular kids. I find that very distressing.
BTW, Paige, I totally agree with your proposed solutions. Go outside to smoke, go to bed if you have been drinking (and let someone else drive you home). Good rules.
Very respectfully disagreeing...once again. lol
Call me naive, or dillusional if you will, but the loss of life from second hand smoke cannot compare to the number of drinking related deaths. It's my belief that the polls and percentages are skewed to reflect what is and isn't popular. These numbers are totally dependant upon how the question is posed. Also, I have many friends with children who get ear infections and resperatory illness more often than children of friends who smoke. Telling me that I cannot put total belief in the polls/percentages.
Now, as far as your comment about why you think alcohol abuse is more acceptable than smoking. The "man thing" probably has some barring. But it's my OPINION it's a liberal thing. Please don't attack me for that. I'm not attacking liberals. I'm saying in general....not EVERYONE of them. Because they are the ones who put into affect most of these laws and taxes against tobacco. I think both sides (conservative and liberals) are to blame for the lack of control over alcohol.
Under your "man thing" theory....add cigars. Which are without question more readily accepted than cigarettes. That is defintely a "guy thing"...Ever taste one? GROSS! (Although I guess the same could be said by a non-smoker about cigarettes). And those women who smoke them? The only 'accepted' way for them to smoke without being beaten down for it.
Basically what I want is fairness. I want my right to smoke if I so choose, without being burdened with outragous taxes. Or slammed by society. I can smoke and drive at the same time without it imparing my ability to so. Drinkers cannot say the same thing. If tobaco is deemed unhealthy, how can they NOT deem alcohol?
Lungs, throat, kidneys and livers....all serious organs there. All seriously affected by smoking or drinking in excess. Fair is fair. Punish me for smoking, punish those that drink too. That's all I'm sayin. Don't blow the facts out of proportion to meet your needs (speaking to pollsters/statitionists) They both are bad. They both should be treated as such. If you're going to tax me into quitting (because of cost), ya' better tax those drinkers as well!!
|
Members
