like through “fat taxes” and cigarette taxes.

Whether to “raise revenue” or not, it certainly disturbs me when Republicans sign on for this sort of thing.

Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Based on this definition, I think everyone elected to government bodies must be insane.

It is surprising to me the pain threshold is still not high enough for some in the GOP. Perhaps there are some who simply will not get it and need to be voted out. Republicans need to be about principle, not political maneuvering.

It’s going to continue for the foreseeable future. Conservatism is fine so long as it’s someone else’s handout that’s being taken or some other group’s rights being infringed.

To that “MAN CAUSED DISATER” P. Yousef……
There is a difference between a Republican and a RINO. Since you were not born on American soil, please allow me to school you. The Liberal Democrats and the Rino’s behind the cigarette taxes are little, short, Henry Waxmans (D-Calif). These 400 plus little, short, Henry Waxmans believe that the American People should be remade in their own image, ride bicycles, eat grass, and live in caves with no electricity. Cigarettes are nasty little things? Well so are suicide bombmers! I guess you could school me on that. The problem is the Waxmans in Congress hate the Smokers and love the suicide bombmers. That’s why they are closing GITMO. How about a Punitive Tax on foot bathes, prayer rugs, and suicide bombmers. These “Man Caused Disater”, suicide bombmers, are killing more people a year than Smokers kill in a generation. Punitive Taxation is wrong, regardless of who is behind it. Hope you learned something…you may be next on the TAX hit list.

Thad Altman is called by our local conservative talk show host Bill Mick as “Thad the Impaler”. He has not seen a tax he did not like. So many programs were added here in Florida since 2004, and no one wants to kill any of those. We have the state paying for pre-K for everyone. Glorified day care being paid by the RINO governor Crist. Some people want to Crist to take Martinez’ US Senate seat in 2010 so he can be in a more comfortable place around like-thinking people - Washington, DC

If they’re looking to create revenue, they will fail, but I’m going to be the outlier here and congratulate these guys on the overall effect this policy will likely have.

Why? Because the other important angle here is cost reduction. What does it cost the state Medicaid systems to take care of smokers’ self-inflicted heart disease and cancer? The revenue creation angle to this is weak, but as you point out the externalities here are significant (the tax dollars of non-smokers going to treat self-inflicted cancer being a key one). I’m not a fan of taxes in general, but I’d be more than happy to raise taxes on cigarettes up to the point that it sufficiently reduces smoking behavior to the point that revenue collected covers the cost of treatment (your references seem to help establish the demand curve here). Make it $100/pack for all I care and let them pay for their own medical bills with the taxes they pay.

to the Congress, when they realize they cannot repeal the Law of Diminishing Returns.

Congress should understand Friedman’s statistical work which proved the (seemingly intuitive to all but politicians) assertion: when you tax something, you get less of it, and if you subsidy something, you wll get more of it.

Using that knowledge, Congress could craft a legislative work-around. Since the higher taxes mean fewer people will smoke, which in turn causes shortfalls in the revenues expected from the tax, it is obviously necessary to subsidize the cigarettes themselves. The straightforward subsidy to offset the tax doesn’t exactly enhance revenue, either, so a more creative approach is called for.

GIVE the cigarettes FREE to kids under 18. By the time they’re adults, they will be hooked and a certain percentage of them will continue smoking even at the higher costs, certainly far more smokers than would be out there otherwise. Granted, some of them will need further subsidies, but because smokers live shorter lives, we will eventually make it up in fewer Social Security checks going out.

Everybody wins! And what could possibly go wrong?

Is that we keep losing because we haven’t gone leftward *enough*.

Silly RINOs.

Wall Street wizzzzz kid, Corzine tried it two years ago. It actually resulted in millions less in taxes.

Depends on how far into the pain threshold the tax increase is. Increase taxes high enough and behavior changes. Buy your smokes online, at Indian reservations, tax stamp free at your local bodega, or from the trunk of a car…

No free lunch for greedy legislators.

I have never understood how they have been able to tax,tax,tax, smokers on a legal product. How is it legal to single out one group of people? I guess the same way they can single out CEO’s and businesses etc. Crazy