On 25/06/2012 9:03 AM, Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:
> In article >,
> "Ozgirl" > wrote:
>
>> How does regulating a size cut health care costs? Or putting high taxes
>> on cigarettes and alcohol? People will still drink and smoke the same
>> amounts regardless of personal cost or difficulty in obtaining a
>> product.
>
> that's just wrong. you only have to look at the general downward trend of
> smokers in states that tax tobacco heavily. in addition, while it may not have
> an immediate effect, there are incremental decreases due to these high costs to
> deter new smokers. finally, while the higher cost might not deter specific
> individuals on their own due to that cost, as the disposable income becomes
> scarcer in "relationships", the pressure is increased on the smoker to quit by
> the "spouse"
>
Not sure where in the world you are but here the market for illegal
tobacco increases every time they raise the price of tobacco products
there is no tobacco legally grown in Australia any-more but there is a
huge black market in illegal products if there is money to be made the
crooks will do it. shades of Prohibition if the Government tax is too
high someone will start making or growing it,

>
>
> I know, I wasn't going to get into this argument. There is no
>> realistic way at this point in time to cut universal health costs by
>> putting regulations on things that make us obese or prone to ailments
>> and illnesses brought on by use of illegal drugs, alcohol, cigarettes or
>> food/drink/ prescription drug intake. Its just something we have to suck
>> up, watching our tax dollars get used for things we may not partake of.
>> Other than health there are many tax payer provided stuff that I have no
>> or little interest in. I don't as a rule use public transport, the next
>> tax payer does. I don't do government supported theatre or art
>> galleries, the next person does. I use public libraries, my neighbour
>> might not. And so it goes on.


--
(- -)
=m=(_)=m=
RodS T2
Australia