Would you support a tax break for smokers trying to quit?

I mean, that's why they banned tobacco commercials.

bloodling

[QUOTE="bloodling"]

I mean, that's why they banned tobacco commercials.

LJS9502_basic

Not necessarily, but when everyone is doing it around you, it kinda does for some people, it depends.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="bloodling"]

I mean, that's why they banned tobacco commercials.

bloodling

Not necessarily, but when everyone is doing it around you, it kinda does for some people, it depends.

[QUOTE="bloodling"]

I mean, that's why they banned tobacco commercials.

LJS9502_basic

I see plenty of commercials for things like Captain Morgan, Bacardi, etc.

Is that craving? Or wanting to fit it?LJS9502_basic

It is hard to draw the line sometimes.

I wouldn't get stressed I would jump straight to suicidal with out my cigarettes and go drowned my self... then the non-smoker would have to be all alone and he would get far more stressed for far long while I'm enjoying my death... W1ckedGo0se

You do realize that only goes to show that you are indeed an addict...

But how did this discussion go from the government paying people to get clean from the semantics of the definition of "craving".

Nahh, smokers are NOT aware of the dangers.

I'm certain any smoker might be able to spit them out at me, but "knowing" the dangers and "being aware" of them are two different things.

Nahh, smokers are NOT aware of the dangers.

I'm certain any smoker might be able to spit them out at me, but "knowing" the dangers and "being aware" of them are two different things.

Merranvo

Yeah, they are aware. Just as most peole are aware of the dangers of driving but choose to get in the car everyday.

Invincibility Fallacy.

I'm too bored to explain simple psychology to you all... but the fact is that people who get in a car are NOT aware of the risks... they SURPRESS the risks. They IGNORE the risks... because they don't believe the risks are risks at all.

I mean, *meh, explaining simple psychology*, consider russian roulette. At what odds would you consider a million dollars worth the risk of instant death? At what odds would you do it again? And again?

It's not about if you KNOW the chances... it's about how much you believe it will happen to you.

Honestly, there is enough incentive to quit on its own. Think of the large amount of money that people spend on smoking. I think a pack of cigarettes can run upwards of 4-5$, and people can smoke 1 to 2 packs per day. Thats 8-10$/day, 56-70$ per week, or $2900 to 3650$ per year. There's your "tax break". Plus add in the additional health benefits and you've got a ton.

Yes, I deserve to be rewarded for my efforts.wallneck

Invincibility Fallacy.

I'm too bored to explain simple psychology to you all... but the fact is that people who get in a car are NOT aware of the risks... they SURPRESS the risks. They IGNORE the risks... because they don't believe the risks are risks at all.

I mean, *meh, explaining simple psychology*, consider russian roulette. At what odds would you consider a million dollars worth the risk of instant death? At what odds would you do it again? And again?

It's not about if you KNOW the chances... it's about how much you believe it will happen to you.

Merranvo

Ignoring risk does not equal not being aware of it. And no, you need not explain simple psychology to me. I'm well aware of it, giving that I'm married to someone who has a degree in it.

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

Hell no, highly increase the price of cigarettes, or stop selling them in shops all together. Sure there would be a black market, but it'd stop a hell of a lot of people. Smoking is a terrible habbit, and a bigger chunk of the population not smoking would be wonderful on so many levels. They shouldn't get money for it, it was their choice to smoke in the first place.Nercay

I think it should be clear by now what a terrible, disasterous idea prohibition is.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="bloodling"]

I mean, that's why they banned tobacco commercials.

worlock77

I see plenty of commercials for things like Captain Morgan, Bacardi, etc.

[QUOTE="wallneck"]Yes, I deserve to be rewarded for my efforts.jam19911000

[QUOTE="jam19911000"][QUOTE="wallneck"]Yes, I deserve to be rewarded for my efforts.testfactor888

No, I only support tax breaks for the rich.

[spoiler] Sarcasm [/spoiler]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Well no. They banned tobacco commercials because they didn't want to make the product appear appealing. Same reason we don't see hard liquor ads....least I've never seen one. The commercial might make the lifestyIe appear "sexy".....which may make you think....why not? But it wouldn't make you crave the product.

LJS9502_basic

I see plenty of commercials for things like Captain Morgan, Bacardi, etc.

Yeah, read it the first time. It doesn't overrule that the rest of you post pretty much flat out stated that such ads don't exist, which isn't true.

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

Pirate700

[QUOTE="Pirate700"]

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

J-WOW

[QUOTE="J-WOW"][QUOTE="Pirate700"]

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

W1ckedGo0se

Absolutely, especially if it's for a good cause, like stopping to smoke. It's not like all that money can't be given back to the very ones who spent it.

People are already quitting without this incentive.chrisrooR

There's already a smoking thread, I know, but I feel if I post this in the other thread, it would only prove to derail it, and that's not what I want to do. Anyway, we all know cigarettes and other tobacco products are taxed up the ass. The reason for this is to make them less desirable, but millions upon millions of people are still smoking. So, what I think would be a better solution would to offer a tax break for people who are clinically trying to quit. What I mean by clinically is smokers that actually have to go to a doctor for prespcription medication or some other forms to help them kick the habit so there's some kind of proof they can submit to the IRS to indeed prove they're quitting. Instead of trying to get people to quit by charging them more money, I honestly believe they should give them back money for quitting. What do you all think?

JustPlainLucas

[QUOTE="JustPlainLucas"]

There's already a smoking thread, I know, but I feel if I post this in the other thread, it would only prove to derail it, and that's not what I want to do. Anyway, we all know cigarettes and other tobacco products are taxed up the ass. The reason for this is to make them less desirable, but millions upon millions of people are still smoking. So, what I think would be a better solution would to offer a tax break for people who are clinically trying to quit. What I mean by clinically is smokers that actually have to go to a doctor for prespcription medication or some other forms to help them kick the habit so there's some kind of proof they can submit to the IRS to indeed prove they're quitting. Instead of trying to get people to quit by charging them more money, I honestly believe they should give them back money for quitting. What do you all think?

Empirefrtw

[QUOTE="W1ckedGo0se"][QUOTE="jam19911000"]That's all fine and well, but you're giving the rest of us secondhand smoke in the process! It's not OUR choice to shorten our lives! We're kinda left at the mercy of smokers!jam19911000

[QUOTE="Empirefrtw"][QUOTE="JustPlainLucas"]

There's already a smoking thread, I know, but I feel if I post this in the other thread, it would only prove to derail it, and that's not what I want to do. Anyway, we all know cigarettes and other tobacco products are taxed up the ass. The reason for this is to make them less desirable, but millions upon millions of people are still smoking. So, what I think would be a better solution would to offer a tax break for people who are clinically trying to quit. What I mean by clinically is smokers that actually have to go to a doctor for prespcription medication or some other forms to help them kick the habit so there's some kind of proof they can submit to the IRS to indeed prove they're quitting. Instead of trying to get people to quit by charging them more money, I honestly believe they should give them back money for quitting. What do you all think?

W1ckedGo0se

[QUOTE="J-WOW"][QUOTE="Pirate700"]

Of course not. The very idea is absurd, IMO.

W1ckedGo0se

[QUOTE="W1ckedGo0se"][QUOTE="jam19911000"]That's all fine and well, but you're giving the rest of us secondhand smoke in the process! It's not OUR choice to shorten our lives! We're kinda left at the mercy of smokers!jam19911000