Chef Jim Posted April 6, 2009 Share Posted April 6, 2009 What will they do after say 50% of the current smokers quit. Raise the tobacco tax again? Increase taxes on beer and booze? Increase taxes on Cable and Internet? Increase taxes on Gas and Oil? Yes, yes, yes, yes and yes. Oh sorry but that was just one too many yeses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 So what's the next step in your moronic tobacco tax alternate reality continuum? Since we all know that increasing the tobacco tax will invariably result in 100% of smokers quitting cold turkey, and this will invariably result in the government providing subsidies to tobacco farmers, what is going to follow the subsidies? Let me guess- more gun laws? Embryo farming? The Fairness Doctrine? Maybe if you consult your local corporate overlord he would be willing to include a detailed tobacco tax continuum spreadsheet along with your weekly global warming talking point mailing! Except nothing has to be 100% failing or even close to it for government to subsidize it. It's never worked that way (especially when the FSA is involved) and it never will. But thanks for coming back with an actual strawman of your own because the continuing hypocrisy masked as condescension is so very surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 Oh thanks, I'm all too happy to get slack from someone who buys the argument that they're taxing tobacco to pay for health care - but I'm the one who isn't smart. You might as well change your moniker to "Bad Liberal Talking Point". Or we could just shorten it to "Bad Molson" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Big Man Posted April 10, 2009 Share Posted April 10, 2009 Thats the lib/Dem way, Big Govt. Big Govt needs big money. Taxes are going up and mostly on luxury items. The workers burden not the poor disenfranchised burden. The Obamanation* says it is better to be unemployed and mooching off the system and we will punish those who are self motivated and get up and go to work and enjoy the finer things in life. Smell the ambers burning from what was the greatest country in the world. You all bought the lies ...now reap the fruit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 Just exactly how many people that earn over $90k a year still smoke? President BO has just put a big tax on the little guy - and by all accounts many of them voted for this clown. Sweet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 Just exactly how many people that earn over $90k a year still smoke?President BO has just put a big tax on the little guy - and by all accounts many of them voted for this clown. Sweet. Yes, but he's helping fund health care for children. Granted, he is about to charge everyone for a $650B down payment on a nationalized health care program, and to date that program consists of a bunch of health care people having tea at the White House to discuss how to best spend that money, but until then, something had to be done. And honestly, who cares if the very people who were promised no taxes were the very first to get taxed? It's just...y'know...sometimes we have to change our position on things. Like lobbyists. Transparency. That kind of stuff. So it's okay. Pay no attention to the white trash protesting this week. They know not what is good for them. Only the government can help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Big Man Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 Just exactly how many people that earn over $90k a year still smoke?President BO has just put a big tax on the little guy - and by all accounts many of them voted for this clown. Sweet. Yeah , that is funny, isn't it? 6 months ago this page was mouth piece for Barry Obama and now you can hardly find a backer of the new Prez*. Where is Obama's* blind followers like Yellowlinesinmyshorts? Liberal, democrat cowards. Stand up and take a bow for this evil you have elected, be proud that you aided to the delinquency of this once great country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 There is no doubt that times are still tough," Obama said. "But from where we stand, for the very first time, we are beginning to see glimmers of hope. And beyond that, way off in the distance, we can see a vision of an America's future that is far different than our troubled economic past. What the hell does that mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 What the hell does that mean? Hope - like bullshite - springs eternal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 What the hell does that mean? It's in the next sentence after that one. That's how speeches work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 Hope - like bullshite - springs eternal. You've sprung a leak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 It's in the next sentence after that one. That's how speeches work. Well seeing I don't search out sites that reprint intire Obama speeches (I don' have any problems getting to sleep at night) I have no idea what the next line was. How far back in our country's past is he referring to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 Well seeing I don't search out sites that reprint intire Obama speeches (I don' have any problems getting to sleep at night) I have no idea what the next line was. How far back in our country's past is he referring to? The next sentence was about what he meant for the future to change the past. When he was talking about the past, it was basically two things, "The last decade" and "the 20th century". The last decade he used as a reference point for the start of the housing crisis that led to this mess. It could be argued about when it actually started but he was talking in general terms. And it's not as though he said the economy was bad in the 20th century. But what he was really talking about with "the past" and what he mentioned several times was 20th century policies in a 21st century world. And the fact we put off a lot of these important issues in the past that got us here, and we need new policies for the new century and globalization on entitlement reform (Medicare, Social Security, etc), regulation, education, energy and health care, etc . You may or may not believe in that theory. Here is a link to the speech which is at the bottom. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/14/o...o_n_186559.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 15, 2009 Share Posted April 15, 2009 The next sentence was about what he meant for the future to change the past. When he was talking about the past, it was basically two things, "The last decade" and "the 20th century". The last decade he used as a reference point for the start of the housing crisis that led to this mess. It could be argued about when it actually started but he was talking in general terms. And it's not as though he said the economy was bad in the 20th century. But what he was really talking about with "the past" and what he mentioned several times was 20th century policies in a 21st century world. And the fact we put off a lot of these important issues in the past that got us here, and we need new policies for the new century and globalization on entitlement reform (Medicare, Social Security, etc), regulation, education, energy and health care, etc . You may or may not believe in that theory. Here is a link to the speech which is at the bottom. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/14/o...o_n_186559.html And most of all, I want every American to know that each action we take and each policy we pursue is driven by a larger vision of America's future - a future where sustained economic growth creates good jobs and rising incomes; a future where prosperity is fueled not by excessive debt, reckless speculation, and fleeing profit, but is instead built by skilled, productive workers; by sound investments that will spread opportunity at home and allow this nation to lead the world in the technologies, innovations, and discoveries that will shape the 21st century. So we didn't use skilled, productive workers, sound investments and we didn't lead the world in technology, innovations in the 20th century? Gee, news to me. But this recession is different. This recession was not caused by a normal downturn in the business cycle. It was caused by a perfect storm of irresponsibility and poor decision-making that stretched from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street. Yes this one was different but sounds exactly like the last one. It's a plan that is already in the process of saving or creating 3.5 million jobs over the next two years Is that saving or creating? What's the plan here? It is putting money directly in people's pockets with a tax cut for 95% of working families that is now showing up in paychecks across America Kind of like what Bush did in the last recession, however he cut taxes for 100% of Americans but also added incentives to invest in the market. What's the incentive to invest in this plan? I'm sorry man that's it. I've got a life. I couldn't go through that whole speech. What a !@#$ing blowhard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Just exactly how many people that earn over $90k a year still smoke?President BO has just put a big tax on the little guy - and by all accounts many of them voted for this clown. Sweet. You would be surprised. You need to look at where people live and the pay scale for those regions. The average salary in the DC region ranges from $80,000 to $100,000 The average salary in the Rochester region ranges from $30,000 to $50,000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 You would be surprised. You need to look at where people live and the pay scale for those regions. The average salary in the DC region ranges from $80,000 to $100,000 The average salary in the Rochester region ranges from $30,000 to $50,000. The average person person doesn't smoke. What's your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts