home
S-Chip Veto Overide Fails in the House | 47 comments (47 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Not to butt in, but (none / 0) (#26)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 02:51:56 PM EST
tobacco taxes can reasonably be described as regressive as well. No?
Current smoking prevalence also was higher among adults living below the poverty level* (32.9%) than among those at or above the poverty level (22.2%). During 1983--2002, the gap in smoking prevalence between those living below the poverty line and those living at or above it increased from 8.7 percentage points to 10.7 percentage points (Figure 1). In addition, the percentage of ever smokers who had quit was higher for persons at or above the poverty level than for those below the poverty line. As with current smoking prevalence, this gap was larger in 2002 than in 1983 (20.0 percentage points versus 18.7 percentage points).


[ Parent ]
Yes but (none / 0) (#37)
by Molly Bloom on Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 04:52:39 PM EST
(Pun intended).

raising the cost of tobacco does make an economic incentive to quit smoking. Cancer rates are down, but only because less people are smoking. That does have a positive effect on health care.

"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"
[ Parent ]

Yes No (none / 0) (#38)
by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 04:58:04 PM EST
does make an economic incentive to quit

Then why do more of the poor smoke???

[ Parent ]

Gee Jim (none / 0) (#44)
by Molly Bloom on Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 07:44:13 PM EST
You don't think the rising price of cigarrettes has anything to do with the drop in smokers?

Failure of logic to assume because poor people smoke in greater numbers means the price of cigarettes has no effect on smoking, especially in light of the undeniable drop in smoking overall. Or do you think only the well to do stops smoking?

You really do have a probelm with the fallacy of false cause.

"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"
[ Parent ]

I agree with you, (none / 0) (#40)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 05:06:15 PM EST
although some might suggest that it sounds like you're saying that regressive taxation is bad, except when you say it's not...

[ Parent ]
I don't approve of it as a means of rasing revnue (none / 0) (#43)
by Molly Bloom on Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 07:38:22 PM EST
I don't object to it as a tool to reduce smoking.

Its fiscally foolish to rely on it as the sole source of revenue.

the some who

might suggest that it sounds like you're saying that regressive taxation is bad, except when you say it's not...

are probably the same ones who believe in supply side economics AND balanced budgets; or

believed Bush when he said Iraq was an imminent threat; or

believed Bush when he said he would fire the leakers.

I don't worry about that group of people thinks.

"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"
[ Parent ]

In other words (1.00 / 0) (#45)
by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 09:09:16 PM EST
you and facts are not well acquainted.

[ Parent ]
I am better acquainted with facts (5.00 / 1) (#47)
by Molly Bloom on Sat Oct 20, 2007 at 08:10:33 AM EST
than you are with intelligence.

"Once in a while you get shown the light In the strangest of places if you look at it right"
[ Parent ]

S-Chip Veto Overide Fails in the House | 47 comments (47 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft