HunterCA
Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01 quote:
ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr quote:
ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01 Yes it is good. Suppliers go out of business. Addicts do one of two things: 1) Get help (theoretically more drug rehab funds available from taxation 2) Die from their addiction of cheap heroin Either way demand goes down. Okay. I need a minute, here. It's okay for me, a non-weed smoking tax payer to to subsidize the results of an addicts poor choices, but society has demonized me for smoking tobacco and has flat-out told me that they won't subsidize the results of my poor choices? I guess some people are more equal than others. Michael First of all, the only ones paying the taxes, are the ones using the drugs. So you are not subsidzing anyone. Secoondly I am all for using revenue from taxed tobacco to be used for Nicotine rehab as well!!! The nicotine in tobacco (as it has been genetically engineered by the tobacco companies) is as (or more so) addicting than heroin. By all means, use the money to help you break the addiction! Nicotine addicts need as much help as heroin addicts! Gees, I wish I had a dollar for every city council meeting I sat in where I heard something like, "Oh goodness, we got a lot of FREE money from tobacco settlement claims. What pointless liberal program can we waste it on now and pretend there is some link to rehabilitating tobacco users?" I don't know about you but I drive everywhere now and see gobs of tobacco rehabilitation centers using the billions of dollars in fines the tobacco industry paid in the settlement. Drive around your city. I'm sure you'll see the same if you look.
< Message edited by HunterCA -- 5/3/2015 10:46:09 AM >
|