Tobacco tax on the increase.

[davereid]

Of course it wont work. This one is no different from all the other Nat policies. It's just that a few more on here are starting to see the 'light'.'
Skyryder

The entire Left voted for it, without debate.

[SS90]

I dont smoke, never have. The only drug I use is alcohol. But, when I was an impoverished student, alcohol was a big part of my budget.

So I made a still. Now I make my alcohol, it better than the bought stuff - I had it tested on a gas chomatograph, and its great. I also make my own beer. Sometimes its good, even excellent.

So just grow your own tobacco. Its legal, and easy as growing cabbage.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Tobacco-Grow...Curing-at-Home

I don't smoke either, never have, and never will.

I support the idea of raising taxes on such things, Beer as well, jesus, have you seen the price of a friggin Beer in a inner city bar in NZ lately?

It's unbelieveable, but we still pay, push the price up, the money comes from other areas. simple.

The government don't want you to stop smoking, they need it.

Let's say the revinue is a billion NZ (as a round figure), the health costs are 400 million (round figure), then, if everyone did stop smoking, then the government will have to find 600 million dollars from somewhere else, it's that simple!

[blackdog]

cigs go up 25% in oz tonight

what is the connection here that i can't quite put my finger on?

[pete376403]

The entire Left voted for it, without debate.

Probably because the tax was a maori party initiative. Labour could not be seen to be against it 'cos the M P are going to be the kingmakers (again) at next election.

[freedom-wedge]

There is no way that this is the reason it hasn't been banned. Imagine if a political party suddenly said they were going to permanently ban all alcohol, or all cigarrettes. How long do you think they'd stay in power? In all seriousness? Even if the party recovered and made a comeback, it would be unlikely to happen during the political careers of those who banned said substance.

People who think the government are refusing to ban substances like this due to the tax they receive are deluding themselves. It's much simpler - political survival.

Political survival makes it ok to fudge the figures, its happend many time before, and its more frequent now, all ministries are directed from a central point, intent on verifying their own point, I would beleive these fgures if they were provided by an independant org, its just to easy to do this sort of thing, look at ACC and the fgures, they only add up becuase the minister says they do , P .Dath even knows this, I can see his point but Its all messed up and theres a lot more bullshit going to be fed to us very soon, in order to claw a few more cents here and there, personally I wish everyone would just quit smoking and force the issue. most points of veiw in this thread are valid, its just the figures and who puts them together thats the real worry, once your mislead on purpose it will happen again and become normal, its for your own good remember.

[p.dath]

So just grow your own tobacco. Its legal, and easy as growing cabbage.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Tobacco-Grow...Curing-at-Home

I'd be really interesting to see a study of "grown your own" tobacco. I suspect it wont be nearly as dangerous as commercial ciagrettes. They put all sorts of nasty chemicals into commcerical cigarettes. Then again, you might find the lack of these additional chemicals working on your brain might produce a product less satisfying ...

[freedom-wedge]

Back in the good old days, cigs, drink and other vices were all targets on budget day regardless, health figures werent even mentioned, it was a progressive tax becuase it was easy and became easier to sell. The demonisation of smokers now is an example of how to use popular opionon against the populace in order to raise the take. Its easy stuff. The finance ministers obviously got hold of the publication, how to raise money from dummies. well thats my take on it all

[p.dath]

Back in the good old days, cigs, drink and other vices were all targets on budget day regardless, health figures werent even mentioned, it was a progressive tax becuase it was easy and became easier to sell. The demonisation of smokers now is an example of how to use popular opionon against the populace in order to raise the take. Its easy stuff. The finance ministers obviously got hold of the publication, how to raise money from dummies. well thats my take on it all

Nah. The majority of the population has jot sick of smokers and dealing with them.

[freedom-wedge]

True but sticking it to them like this is acceptable because it dosnt affect you maybe, I,m a non smoker dont hang with them even, by choice, as I understand your a bit of a libertarian, and if people wanna burn dry leaves in there mouths well shouldnt it be their choice, if you want to ride a bike its the same, take some of that money they are stealing from joe pub and take out medical insurance for the smoker so he or she wont tax the health sector, on a large scale it could be done and be cost effective, only then you would see what a big take they get, the true take lets say. Anyway I do hear ya

[freedom-wedge]

Nah. The majority of the population has jot sick of smokers and dealing with them.

did reply but I forgot to quote you, I havent had a cigerette this morning yeeeetettttt :-)

[p.dath]

True but sticking it to them like this is acceptable because it dosnt affect you maybe, I,m a non smoker dont hang with them even, by choice, as I understand your a bit of a libertarian, and if people wanna burn dry leaves in there mouths well shouldnt it be their choice,

They (or should I say, people) should be free to exercise their own choices - unless they hurt others or their actions are against the morals of society. The line gets crossed for me when other people get hurt.

Smoking endangers the health of others. Their children, brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, friends, colleagues, work mates, etc. And because it is addictive they can't stop.
And children are encouraged to smoke who watch their parents (who smoke). I don't know of any parent who seriously wants their children to take up smoking.

Hurting others is not acceptable, and this is why action needs to be taken. You have to remember, smoking messes with your brains chemistry. It can distort perceptions.

Now of course, some smokers try to be considerate by not smoking around others, going outside, etc. But on the whole, the damage being done to society and loved ones is so great that action needs to be taken.

[freedom-wedge]

They (or should I say, people) should be free to exercise their own choices - unless they hurt others or their actions are against the morals of society. The line gets crossed for me when other people get hurt.

Smoking endangers the health of others. Their children, brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, friends, colleagues, work mates, etc. And because it is addictive they can't stop.
And children are encouraged to smoke who watch their parents (who smoke). I don't know of any parent who seriously wants their children to take up smoking.

Hurting others is not acceptable, and this is why action needs to be taken. You have to remember, smoking messes with your brains chemistry. It can distort perceptions.

Now of course, some smokers try to be considerate by not smoking around others, going outside, etc. But on the whole, the damage being done to society and loved ones is so great that action needs to be taken.

Agreed, direct action not direct taxation however, they have the money to solve this even though they say not. Its a problem once solved will create another problem, a shortage of cash for the gov. Their not seriously trying to slove this issue I feel. Anyway your points are valid and I,m in agreement.

[onearmedbandit]

They (or should I say, people) should be free to exercise their own choices - unless they hurt others or their actions are against the morals of society. The line gets crossed for me when other people get hurt.

Which is why I, as a smoker, don't smoke around anyone else who doesn't smoke. Even if I'm out in the open, I'll go have a smoke away from non smokers and out of view of children.

Smoking endangers the health of others. Their children, brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, friends, colleagues, work mates, etc. And because it is addictive they can't stop.
And children are encouraged to smoke who watch their parents (who smoke). I don't know of any parent who seriously wants their children to take up smoking.

I have a 10yr old daughter (who I never smoke in front of) who is aware of all the risks and dangers of smoking, who I can almost guarantee will never have a single smoke. She doesn't like the fact that I do, but accepts that it is my choice. I will also work hard to help make sure she never takes up the habit. As a smoker I'm pretty sure I should be able to spot the signs.

Hurting others is not acceptable, and this is why action needs to be taken. You have to remember, smoking messes with your brains chemistry. It can distort perceptions.

Smoking what now? Do you have any evidence to back up your claim?

Now of course, some smokers try to be considerate by not smoking around others, going outside, etc. But on the whole, the damage being done to society and loved ones is so great that action needs to be taken.

So even though we self regulate (out of courtesy and decency) our legal habit you still want action taken?

[oldrider]

The entire Left voted for it, without debate.

You suggest that there is a "right" in there!

I see two "major" left wing (socialist) parties vying for the support of the "minor" left wing parties!

If the entire house voted, it would be "left wing" in my opinion!

Big government (the state) forcing their will upon the unsuspecting people equals freedom lost, in the guise of "saving us from our selves"! Yeah right!

[Skyryder]

The entire Left voted for it, without debate.

True but it's the Nats that will be remembered for it. If this increase is to work then the tax has to be adjusted to keep up with the cost of living. Short term there will be a decrease but as the cost of living rises to match the tobacco 'tax' the increse will have less effect.

Skyryder