Big government tramples over business and individual rights

[elusivecorn]

Currently in Michigan we have a smoking ban going through legislature, which has failed to pass 3.. 4 times now? I've lost count.

Many bans like the one proposed have been passed in 3 dozen other states. They completely ban smoking in restaurants, bars, casinos, and any type of hospitality place. (even bowling alleys) Now ofcourse this doesn't include tribal owned establishments.

This takes away the business's right to decide to designate their establishment smoking or non-smoking.
(Most establishments in Michigan designate themselves non-smoking already)

On top of this, Michigan has an extremely high tobacco tax, 2 dollars a pack. (which is most likely being raised again)

The state tobacco tax, plus the federal tobacco tax is causing smokers to pay more in taxes, then they do for the actual pack of cigarettes.

Now I am not a smoker, but the lengths the government is going to control people's habits are downright disturbing. They are making smokers pay an arm and a leg to consume a legal substance, and talking about raising the taxes even more (what position does this put low income people in? not a very good one) Not only are low income people suffering at the hand of big government, it is causing a spur in organized crime, cigarettes are being smuggled across state lines from states that have low cigarette taxes (30 cents a pack in some states)... Costing Michigan millions of dollars in tax revenue.

Not only does the government want to tax smokers an arm and a leg, they want to intervene on non-government owned establishments and tell them they cant allow smoking.

Per the Michigan Clean Air act of 1987
Smoking is prohibited in childcare and healthcare facilities.
Restaurants can designate up to a certain percent of their building as a smoking area.

What more needs to be done? Is it right for the government to try to eliminate smoking from our society? Is it right for them to intervene in the free market and tell business how to run themselves?

My personal belief is that the high taxes on cigarettes are not right, its almost as bad as stealing. The government stepping in and telling businesses how to run themselves defeats the purpose of a free-market.

They already have business owners act as tax collectors, what else is next? A soda tax? Yep it is next, along with proposed obesity taxes and the like. They want to tax anything unhealthy to cut consumption and deprive people of the right to choose. If you don't believe me look it up.

They day a government tax collector comes to more door asking for my BMI is the day he pries it from my cold, dead, hands.

Another note I'd like to add, certain states do not have laws protecting them from employer discrimination for legal habits (such as drinking and smoking)

Many employers in said states are firing employs for smoking, or telling them to quit or they will be fired.

What is wrong with this country?

[Admiral Piett]

Michigan is a messed up state in general, elusivecorn. I'd get out of there. The state has managed to have one of the highest points of unemployment and low standards of living of most states in the union. You've also got these weird laws. I've had several offers to live up there, but I'd even accept Texas over it as backwards as it is. Like banning radar detectors. How the heck can you ban a radar detector when its basically a radio using public air?

[Ulyaoth]

Like banning radar detectors. How the heck can you ban a radar detector when its basically a radio using public air?

Those are banned in a number of states.

[B5C]

My state has a simular law as well, but it was voted by the people. I voted no on the law because it treats the businesses unfair. Also the biggest supporter of the law was tribal casinos who don't have to follow that law. Now Washington is thinking expanding the law to people's homes as well.

[Avendiel]

I'll feel sorry for tobacco smokers when pot is legal.

[Erik]

I'll feel sorry for tobacco smokers when pot is legal.

Ironically, high taxes seems to work a lot better than an outright ban.

But I will never feel sorry for tobacco smokers for one simple reason: they are polluting my air.
If they find an unhealthy hobby that doesn't affect me, then they can do that all day long for all I care. - suggestion: glue sniffing.

[Dunecat]

But I will never feel sorry for tobacco smokers for one simple reason: they are polluting my air.

Do you drive a car?

Do you use public transportation?

Do you use electricity from the city power grid?

Without a government ban, bars/returaunts are held hostage by a relatively small percent of costumers who will take their buisness elsewhere if the establishment bans smoking. With a overall ban applied to all buisnesses, the playing field is level, and there is no danger of losing buisness to your competitors. In the end buisnesses can focus on providing a better enviroment for the bulk of their costumers who don't smoke. And in my experience, the smokers still offer their buisness, and you'll see dozens outside of bars even in sub-zero weather.

So instead of everyone getting what they want, only non-smokers get what they want.

Because why should they walk next door to the non-smoking restaurant.

[Erik]

Do you drive a car?

No, but I'm currently learning for my drivers license.
When I have a license I plan to drive maybe once a month or so.

Do you use public transportation.

Yes, but almost always electric (trams, subway, train).

My daily commute and almost all other travel inside the city I do by bicycle.

Do you use electricity from the city power grid?

Yes, but what's the problem with that?

Electricity plants might cause global warming, but not lung cancer.

I'm also strongly in favor of air pollution laws for vehicles, btw.
Like mandatory catalysts and soot filters.
And I also think we should have free public transport inside the city, to encourage people to leave their car near the motorway and enter/exit the inner city by public transport (would also solve the parking problem)

[Dunecat]

No.



Yes, but almost always electric (trams, subway, train).



Yes, but what's the problem with that?

Electricity plants might cause global warming, but not lung cancer.

Generating electricity does not pollute the air?

Why not ban cars?

No, you're right, a misplaced puff of smoke in your face is WORSE then most other sorts of air pollution. 1 misplaced puff a year = cancer.

[The Unvirginzer]

But I will never feel sorry for tobacco smokers for one simple reason: they are polluting my air.
If they find an unhealthy hobby that doesn't affect me, then they can do that all day long for all I care. - suggestion: glue sniffing.

First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.

[Pickle_mole]

they are going to kill their revenue from tabacco tax, tacation discourages behaviour, from smoking to investing.

[Sphere]

I live in a city with a complete smoking ban, and I must say I enjoy it thoroughly. There was a lot of hype that restaraunts and bars where going to go out of buisness, but that never came to fruition except for a handful that shut down immediately after the ban was put in place (I think they were drinking their own Kool-aid on the matter).

What has happened is that most bars have been classed up and bring in more well-to-do cliential and are thriving. And as a non-smoker, these places are far more enjoyable now, though I don't really notice the difference anymore unless I go to a bar outside of the city.

Without a government ban, bars/returaunts are held hostage by a relatively small percent of costumers who will take their buisness elsewhere if the establishment bans smoking. With a overall ban applied to all buisnesses, the playing field is level, and there is no danger of losing buisness to your competitors. In the end buisnesses can focus on providing a better enviroment for the bulk of their costumers who don't smoke. And in my experience, the smokers still offer their buisness, and you'll see dozens outside of bars even in sub-zero weather.

[Chlodwig I.]

Currently in Michigan we have a smoking ban going through legislature, which has failed to pass 3.. 4 times now? I've lost count.

Many bans like the one proposed have been passed in 3 dozen other states. They completely ban smoking in restaurants, bars, casinos, and any type of hospitality place. (even bowling alleys) Now ofcourse this doesn't include tribal owned establishments.

This takes away the business's right to decide to designate their establishment smoking or non-smoking.
(Most establishments in Michigan designate themselves non-smoking already)

On top of this, Michigan has an extremely high tobacco tax, 2 dollars a pack. (which is most likely being raised again)

The state tobacco tax, plus the federal tobacco tax is causing smokers to pay more in taxes, then they do for the actual pack of cigarettes.

Now I am not a smoker, but the lengths the government is going to control people's habits are downright disturbing. They are making smokers pay an arm and a leg to consume a legal substance, and talking about raising the taxes even more (what position does this put low income people in? not a very good one) Not only are low income people suffering at the hand of big government, it is causing a spur in organized crime, cigarettes are being smuggled across state lines from states that have low cigarette taxes (30 cents a pack in some states)... Costing Michigan millions of dollars in tax revenue.

Not only does the government want to tax smokers an arm and a leg, they want to intervene on non-government owned establishments and tell them they cant allow smoking.

Per the Michigan Clean Air act of 1987
Smoking is prohibited in childcare and healthcare facilities.
Restaurants can designate up to a certain percent of their building as a smoking area.

What more needs to be done? Is it right for the government to try to eliminate smoking from our society? Is it right for them to intervene in the free market and tell business how to run themselves?

My personal belief is that the high taxes on cigarettes are not right, its almost as bad as stealing. The government stepping in and telling businesses how to run themselves defeats the purpose of a free-market.

They already have business owners act as tax collectors, what else is next? A soda tax? Yep it is next, along with proposed obesity taxes and the like. They want to tax anything unhealthy to cut consumption and deprive people of the right to choose. If you don't believe me look it up.

They day a government tax collector comes to more door asking for my BMI is the day he pries it from my cold, dead, hands.

Another note I'd like to add, certain states do not have laws protecting them from employer discrimination for legal habits (such as drinking and smoking)

Many employers in said states are firing employs for smoking, or telling them to quit or they will be fired.

What is wrong with this country?

Wait.....
is it really possible to smuggle cigarettes between US States?
So if you travel from NY to LA you have to pay tariffs for certain goods you are carrying with you?
e.g. a barrel of whiskey?
Thats seems wrong to me at first place

Cigarette smoke is harmful to people and can cause cancer. So it is an obligation for the Government to protect its citizens from smoke, which is the target of most no smoking laws.
I mean no one cried when DDT, Asbestos and similar dangerous materials have been prohibited.
So why allow cigarette smoke at places where employees have to work

[elusivecorn]

Wait.....
is it really possible to smuggle cigarettes between US States?
So if you travel from NY to LA you have to pay tariffs for certain goods you are carrying with you?
e.g. a barrel of whiskey?
Thats seems wrong to me at first place

Cigarette smoke is harmful to people and can cause cancer. So it is an obligation for the Government to protect its citizens from smoke, which is the target of most no smoking laws.
I mean no one cried when DDT, Asbestos and similar dangerous materials have been prohibited.
So why allow cigarette smoke at places where employees have to work

Bringing more than two cartons of cigarettes (20 packs) across state lines is considered smuggling and tax evasion.

You are doing it to avoid state taxes on cigarettes, yes the law seems very wrong, but those laws have been here for a long time. The same goes for alcohol as well, not sure what the legal limit is tho.

This wouldn't be a problem if the government didn't tax smokers an arm and a leg.

Its also illegal to buy cigarettes online in Michigan.

[Sphere]

Wait.....
is it really possible to smuggle cigarettes between US States?
So if you travel from NY to LA you have to pay tariffs for certain goods you are carrying with you?
e.g. a barrel of whiskey?
Thats seems wrong to me at first place

There are no tarriffs which are unconstitutional between states. However, smuggling products across state lines and reselling them without paying the states sales tax is illegal. Tobacco alcohol and Gasoline are the most commonly smuggled products.

This is because states generate their revenue mostly through sales taxes, which vary considerably from state to state and product to product (some states don't tax food and clothes, others just food etc.). Alcohol and tobacco generally have incrediably high sales taxes, except for a few states, so it may be very lucrative to take them across state lines and resell them for 50-100% profit.

[Irishmafia2020]

I think that tobacco will ultimately end up being illegal. People who possess, grow, or sell it will go to prison. Putting people in cages is probably a bigger crime than smoking itself! I strongly disagree with the wording of this law. People should be allowed to smoke in private establishments, whereas smoking can be banned from public (government) buildings and transport. This anti-smoking thing will turn into another drug war soon!

Also, coal fired electric plants are a potential cause of lung cancer for large rural parts of the country.

[Phillieas_Caesar]

IMO it just like counties being dry or wet. Plus as a Non-smoker, i really could care less about a smoking ban anyways.

[Irishmafia2020]

You can hardly compare Amsterdam to the United States... We have put millions of people in cages for marijuana, and the same thing will happen with tobacco in this country. Also, we are very, very spread out as a nation. Most of our states are larger than your country, and almost none of them have a comparable population density or cultural context. It takes a lot of energy and cars to live in the USA. These laws will put people in prison in America, we know no other way...

[Erik]

You can hardly compare Amsterdam to the United States...

I'm not, I'm just giving my personal opinion which is that it's good to have laws that improve the air quality for all at the expense of enjoyment for some.

Society as a whole benefits.

We have put millions of people in cages for marijuana, and the same thing will happen with tobacco in this country.

When I was in California, I noticed how few people smoke and how clean bars, restaurants and disco's are.
The smoking discouragements have obviously worked wonders there.
And AFAIK nobody went to jail for smoking tobacco in California.

Also, we are very, very spread out as a nation. Most of our states are larger than your country, and almost none of them have a comparable population density or cultural context. It takes a lot of energy and cars to live in the USA.

You have it in reverse:
Low population density is an advantage for air quality.

It's in crowded cities where people live right next to roads with crawling traffic that air pollution from cars becomes a big issue.

Here is a map of the air quality in the USA:


And here for Europe:

[Ulyaoth]

You have it in reverse:
Low population density is an advantage for air quality.

It's in crowded cities where people live right next to roads with crawling traffic that air pollution from cars becomes a big issue.

But cities are good! Rural and suburban people are evil imperialist white devil polluters, only by banning living outside cities will the Earth survive!