Deseret News | Huntsman wants hefty smoke tax

Reader comments
Huntsman wants hefty smoke tax

Page:
< Previous
1
2

Ex smoker | 1:47 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

i started to smoke in World War II. When I got married and my wife was about to have her first child I said I never wanted to have my children see me smoke so one day I threw away he cigerettes, lighter and quite. I am now 84 and glad I did it. It is so wonderful so not be a slave to smoking. I wish I could help everyone that smokes give it up. You feel better and everything tastes better. I hate to see a tax do it, but I wish we could help all those that smoke quite.

Think through | 2:37 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

some of the statements posted here! Nonsmokers don't think they should have (through increased medical expenses)to pay the medical costs of smokers. So should I, as a smoker object to paying the increased medical costs of such things as obesity, high risk pregnancies, high risk behaviors,(STD's, mountain climbing, etc.?) NOT ALL diabetes is inherited by the way!

Of course not, thats lucicrous!
When we buy insurance, or choose to belong to a cohesive society, we SHOULD accept others maladies, and try to help each other, rather than trying to see how much we can get out of the "other guy". This issue is more about our responsibility towards LIMITING the amount of government (and revenue) than it is about health care. If I choose to quit smoking, I will appreciate all the help I can get, but until then, please just try to do the best you can regarding your own health, not mine!

And if we MUST raise more tax money, lets make it fair to EVERYONE!

KVC | 3:21 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

Chris- SO all of the smokers started smoking because they were addicted to it? I believe they made a conscience choice to start smoking. Heroin and cocaine are addictive too. Should we make them more easily accessible and at a more reasonable price as to not hurt low income families?
Individuals who choose cigarettes over food for their family are selfish. They are unwilling to fight an addiction to provide for their family. So they ask taxpayers to give them food stamps and medicaid so they can continue their smoking habit. Why is that fair to me. I chose not to smoke, but I am being punished by paying for the smokers in many forms.
And to anyone who says obesity kills more than smoking. You are wrong. Statistics do not support that. Especially when you figure smoking contributes to deaths from so many diseases and cancers. It significantly increases your risk of so many medical conditions and is an underlying cause of a huge amount of deaths from heart disease, diabetes, many cancers, not just lung, stroke, aneurysms, and a list too long to mention. It is likely greatly underreported as a contributing cause of death.

Comments continue below

Great Idea: Tax stupid people | 3:30 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

I say tax them into oblivion! A tax on stupid people is a great idea. Keep it up Governor!

Smokers are, by definition, morons. They know the scientific and medical studies, but they choose to shut their brains off and smoke anyone. Then they have the audacity to ask me to pay for their health-related problems. They are selfish dolts. Tax 'em to death!

@11:59 | 3:36 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

For pretty much any smoker, most of their medical problems can be attributed to smoking. So in essence, we should charge them extra for everything. Smoking is even a contributing factor to many acute problems such as colds and pneumonia. The question is, why are we paying for health care for someone who can afford to spend $100/month on cigarettes? $1200/year will more than cover the medical expenses of the average non-smoker for a year. The funny thing is they will pay $100/month for cigarettes, but think that is too expensive for smoking cessation medications and aids that are only temporary costs.
It is just a sad commentary that people complain left and right about the cost of life-saving meds, but don't bat an eye at buying costly, life-damaging cigarettes.
If you hate taxing smokers, maybe we should take a stand as society and tell them that we will no longer pay a dime for their smoking related illnesses, including through medicare. If you want the treatment, pay out of pocket, don't ask me for help. And insurance plans should charge smokers much more, while giving non-smokers big discounts in return. Society should never pay for self-induced medical problems.

To all | 4:48 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

those in favor of the tax:
Do you actually picture your health insurance getting cheaper if no one in the state smoked?

or:
Do you actually think that when everyone in the state stops smoking, that the state gov't won't be asking YOU for the money that they used to get from all the smokers?

or: Do you just dislike smokers, and think they should pay more tax than you do?

Beth | 4:58 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

Smokers do contribute a large proportion of our healthcare costs and therefore raising the amount of taxes on cigarettes a reasonable amount to supplement government healthcare programs seems reasonable to me. However it should NOT be implemented to replace sales tax on food. It is placing an undue share of the burden of our state on the backs of smokers, especially to pay for unrelated programs that everyone benefits from. And need I remind you that smoking is LEGAL?

PS, itï¿½s not just UT and Mormons and the Word of Wisdom that have it out for smokers and smoking. I live in super secular alcoholic Madison, WI and they have been trying to do the exact same thing to smokers. I guess itï¿½s okay to be disgusted by vices other than your own as long as you can keep doing what you want.

PSS Iï¿½m not a smoker.

Re: to all | 5:21 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

Politicians are as addicted to taxes as smokers are to nicotine, as overweight people to overeating....

There will never be enough money to satisfy the spending habits of politicians.

Never.

Why not .. | 6:12 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

Just make it illegal. Because you still want the new tax revenue and still pretend like you care for the health of others. But mostly the money.

Jared | 7:51 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

This is a wonderful idea. Much research has shown that whenever there are substantial increases in cigarette taxes there is a corresponding large decrease in rates of smoking. I've worked as a counselor helping people stop smoking. The state I live in is increasing its cigarette tax. A lot of the smokers I was working with were actually glad the tax was increasing because it was extra incentive for them to quit.

Additionally, smokers in general are a huge burden on the medical and insurance systems. I know that sounds negative and heartless, I don't mean it that way; However, it is true. Diabetes, hypertension, heart attacks, stroke, obesity, cancer, and breathing problems are all more common in smokers than non-smokers. Stopping smoking almost immediately decreases many of these risks (some decrease within days, others take months). Smokers are also more likely to be on Medicare; thus, increasing the taxes, which in turn reduces smoking (again, many studies show that result) will decrease many health costs the government has to pay for.

The Shamwow Guy | 8:51 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

Great idea. People who continue to smoke in the face of this new tax deserve to pay extra. If smokers are dumb enough to continue smoking, I say let them pay our taxes.

Please! | 9:17 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

This is nothing but a sin tax aimed at a particular group of people.
It certainly is not a "conservative republican" idea, because I happen to be one! Regardless of political affiliation this is an idea that smacks of one person deciding what another person can or should do.
The personal decision to smoke, drink or overeat is individual!!!
I don't smoke, never have. It is my choice.
But to target people with a sin tax like this is obscene and nearly as ridiculous as the Zion Curtain.
With this said, I love Utah and am proud to live here. Even though I feel like I am taking crazy pills when I hear this nonsense!

Utah's not the only state.... | 11:13 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

FYI,

For those of you who choose to spend a couple years outside of Utah, you will find those states banning public smoking, increasing taxes on smokers and lowering or dropping food taxes.

Utah is about middle-of-the-pack in all of these progressive ideas. California started public smoking bans long before Utah did.

It's ridiculous to think of this as an LDS or Utah or conservative idea.

long overdue | 11:25 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

Utah has the 34th lowest cigarette tax in the country. The national average is nearly double the current Utah tax. This proposal by the Governor is nothing that many other states have not already done.

Plus it disincentivizes an activity that has numerous negative health and social effects.

Rick | 11:32 p.m. Jan. 7, 2009

This tax isn't just about getting current smokers to quit a large part of it is to prevent people from starting. This tax has been proven effective in other states like New York.

Quite clear | 7:51 a.m. Jan. 8, 2009

Huntsman is a DICTATOR
Smokers and Tobacco built this Country
People like Huntsman has done more to destroy America with weird laws

Typical Utah mentality | 1:11 p.m. Jan. 8, 2009

Are John Hunstman and Mike Waddoups related?
Drop the Mormon agenda, and do what's right for everyone!
Or tax diaper and baby food. THAT will work.!!
What a joke our Government is.

jana | 7:44 p.m. Jan. 9, 2009

I don't smoke nor am I LDS. I choose not to smoke, mainly because I care about my health and I want to be around as long as I can for my son. I find it funny how defensive smokers get but they have no problem polluting the air I breath. I'm not talking about EVERY smoker (so don't get crazy) but I am talking about those who don't see a problem dumping their addiction on non smokers. I say tax the smokers, they too will benefit from no taxes on food. It seems like a good compromise to me.

Will | 3:13 p.m. Jan. 12, 2009

I used to be former military and I would have gladly put my life on the line to protect this country and protect its freedoms. I smoke and enjoy that freedom. I do not mind paying extra to cover me if I get sick from it, but only if it is being used for just that. For example I will not pay extra money for cigareetes to pay for someone who got sick because they ate at burger king everyday and I will not pay extra for Utahs road construction that is what the DMV is for. It is not for anybody to decide my risks as long as it is mine to bare. I can understand if it was hurting someone but I am not when I am smoking clear off in the distance. If anybody got cancer while I was smoking 50 ft away from them it is probably the pollution in the air from coal plants and deisel engines. It is hypocritical to single me out when their are other factors. Everybody wake up your freedoms are being taken through taxing. If you let this keep happening it will not stop with just cigarettes.

Economics | 9:17 a.m. Jan. 13, 2009

A lesson in economics, there WILL BE smokers who are in a position called "on the margin," where an increase or change in the price of cigarettes will cause them to not purchase cigarettes, and therefore be more likely to quit smoking which is healthy for ALL Utahns.

It's a great idea. I'm a firm believer in the regulation of human vices, where its feasible and reasonable. Let's tax cigarettes.

For all you that think obesity is a more serious problem than cigarettes, I say we have a fat tax too, but thats not really reasonable or feasible. I mean, would you put your body fat % on your Utah state tax return?

Page:
< Previous
1
2

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.