Out My Window

It is a shame that the government has to make us do something that is healthy for us but it is their job, after all. To keep us safe, even if it is from ourselves.
Every day brings us new laws to protect the lungs of non-smokers. It is now against the law to smoke in a car that has an under-18 passenger. Most restaurants are strictly no smoking because the regulations to have a smoking section is too costly. Bar owners are waiting on federal and state legislation that will put them out of business as some city laws have done.

I don't dispute for a second that smoking is bad for you, I am just reminiscing about the days when smoking was good for you and good for the government. I hold no ill will toward the activist who have struggled for one reason or another to better the health of this and the next generation. It is an admirable calling.

But let us look at something else for just one second...
If you don't want your kids to do drugs, you don't lie to them about the drugs! When you lie or mislead the public, you lose your creditability. If you want a good laugh, just go have a look at the anti marijuana campaigns from the past.

Now I want to explore the recent taxes levied on cigarettes to the tune of two dollars a pack.
So, the majority think it is okay that the government does this. It is like taxing evil. Right?

If the government is getting more tax money from cigarettes, then shouldn't we get a break on other taxes? No. We are told the money goes to cover the health care burden of smokers. A cost, we are told, that ranges around $100 billion a year. Sounds good doesn't it? Smokers should bear the burden of added health cost. I am still a little unsure who is footing these bills. Is it the insurance companies and the cost passed back to the policy holders? In that case, how are we benefiting from the taxes?

This is what brings us to the part where we are being misled.
We all know that smoking is unhealthy. Government statistics prove this. The same statistics show that smokers die on an average of 10 years earlier than non-smokers. They also show that it cost the government more to care for the extra ten years of health care for non-smokers than the cost of smoking related health problems.
The Surgeon General directed agencies to not mention this fact back in 2004 when they imposed the first outrageous "Sin Tax" on cigarettes.
The truth is that the government reaps a net cost SAVINGS of 32 cents for every pack of cigarettes smoked.
A paper published two decades ago in the Journal of the American Medical Association that found that, taking into account tobacco taxes in effect at the time, smokers were not a financial burden to society.

Now we are facing legislation to turn tobacco sales over to the FDA for regulation. Supporters of this bill are once again citing the cost of health for smokers as a reason for this change.

So if it is the Governments intention to destroy the tobacco industry and make us all quit smoking, so be it. They should just say so and do it. We would all have a better quality of life.
But don't pee on my leg and tell me it is raining!