Oh look, FAIL. 60% OF Smokes in NY Stae are smuggled.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by enterthemadness, Jan 10, 2013.

  1. enterthemadness The Triumvirate

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    28,543
    Likes Received:
    15
    Here is a idea, mate. Lower taxes on smokes. That way, you idiotic state govt won't see such a high level of people turning bad and breaking the law.

    http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/10/news/companies/cigarette-tax-new-york/index.html

    Oh, and banning smokes won't work. The War on Drugs is a huge Failure. Banning smokes would also effect the employment rate. People lose their jobs, gas stations and mini marts lose money. Not very good.
     
  2. Pink Ranger The North Remembers

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2004
    Messages:
    34,630
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Wait until we see soft drink speakeasies.
     
  3. Optimus_Prime_ Registered

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2006
    Messages:
    5,667
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's one of our largest ports (may in fact be still our largest and most active port), so NYC has always been, as far as I know, the smuggling capital of the United States. A lot of what's smuggled into New York ends up in all corners of the country, but that's not to say there aren't a lot of cheap cigarettes around. I finally found the study, at the Tax Foundation, but I can find nothing in the study that indicates where they got this data, how, or by what methodology. I'm a little suspicious because they're a pro-business research group. This doesn't seem like very good research. 5 of the mere 7 citations link back to their own website.

    http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/ff351.pdf

    Fact is, New York rate of actual smokers is declining (whether the remaining who categorize as smokers smuggle or not, who cares), I think last I checked it hovered around 14%, which is down from where it was many, many years ago. That's the point of the tax; to dissuade people from smoking, which apparently, it has been doing. The purpose was not to cut down on smuggling, which may have increased, but that's an unintended consequence of the legislation. Seems to me like it's addressing the problem fine.
     
    #3 Optimus_Prime_, Jan 11, 2013
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2013

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"