Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 147: Line 147:     
:We're not talking about economics in this particular article; we're talking about people who say one thing and do another.  With regard to smoking-related taxation, there are people who demanded the tax, both in state government and in anti-smoking organizations, and these same people expected to make a windfall in revenue as soon as taxes were raised, ''while at the same time telling the public they expect people would reduce or quit smoking as a result of the higher rates''.  The only way that the state can collect those higher rates is for people to be smoking; the state cannot collect the taxes from cigarette sales if nobody is lighting up.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:27, 31 July 2007 (EDT)
 
:We're not talking about economics in this particular article; we're talking about people who say one thing and do another.  With regard to smoking-related taxation, there are people who demanded the tax, both in state government and in anti-smoking organizations, and these same people expected to make a windfall in revenue as soon as taxes were raised, ''while at the same time telling the public they expect people would reduce or quit smoking as a result of the higher rates''.  The only way that the state can collect those higher rates is for people to be smoking; the state cannot collect the taxes from cigarette sales if nobody is lighting up.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:27, 31 July 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
::A possible explanation is that the proponents of anti-smoking legislation wish to acquire it because it will reduce smoking (provding the political and social impetus for the change), while at the same time, attempt to rationalize with opponents of the move by re-assuring them that it would not have a severely detrimental effect. It sounds like '''politics''', not hypocrisy. [[User:Stryker|Stryker]] 12:35, 31 July 2007 (EDT)
    
What basic economics tells you is that both is possible. You can raise the taxes by 7%, and then make a windfall and have consumption drops by up to 6.5%. What is so difficult to understand about that. [[User:Order]]
 
What basic economics tells you is that both is possible. You can raise the taxes by 7%, and then make a windfall and have consumption drops by up to 6.5%. What is so difficult to understand about that. [[User:Order]]
228

edits

Navigation menu