$7 a Pack Cigarettes in NYC

[johnnymk]

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg signed a bill yesterday that will raise the city's cigarette tax to $1.50 a pack beginning today. City officials and opponents of smoking say the increase will give New York the highest cigarette tax in the nation and push the price of some brands to more than $7 a pack.

"This may be the most important measure my administration takes to save people's lives," Mr. Bloomberg said before signing the bill during an unusual Sunday morning public hearing in City Hall. The timing was necessary for the law to take effect today.

Under the new law, the city's cigarette tax will grow by $1.42 from the current 8 cents a pack. On top of that, the city's smokers will have to pay the highest state cigarette tax in the nation, an additional $1.50 a pack. The two taxes will increase the price of some brands to more than $7 a pack, which is nearly double the national average.

As anti-smoking advocates praised the tax, smokers complained bitterly that the city was balancing its budget on their backs. And a representative of bodega owners warned that many stores could be driven out of business and that more smokers would buy black market cigarettes.

[Ladogaboy]

They're raising the tax in California too...

And my dad will still smoke like a chimney... :2far:

[nickel]

expensive habit, but i doubt the increase will deter those that want to continue.

[WhiskeyPapa]

As much as I hate this "backdoor" method of eliminating cigarettes, I must admit that it works. Both my mom and dad, as well as my wife's parents and my sister-in-law have all quit smoking in the past 10 years because it just got to be so darn expensive.

[brainsmile]

terrible habit

[Burzhui]

I say legalize it ;)

better kick and cheaper, and not addctive.... unless they start adding **** to make you addicted

[faither]

If you charged $50 a pack you still probably wouldn't recover all the money that's spent on smoking-related illnesses. An extreme but equitable deal would be to eliminate the taxes if smokers would agree to cover their own medical costs (i.e., Let them opt out of all insurance coverage and gov't sponsored health entitlements).

[Speedfreak]

Originally posted by Burzhui
I say legalize it ;)

What? It's not illegal. Everyone has Glaucoma.

[Merlin]

And in related news...Cigarette sales in northern New Jersey and Southern Conn. soar as New Yorkers stock up...

I hate cigarettes just as much as the next guy but this tax the hell out of them idea seems a little ill concieved. Too easy to get around. You'll just wind up hurting local merchants by driving their business away.

[attgig]

Originally posted by Merlin
And in related news...Cigarette sales in northern New Jersey and Southern Conn. soar as New Yorkers stock up...

how is that related? :P

anyways...I could see people going crazy at Sam's clubs/ BJ's/ Price club - buying cartons from them whenever they make the trek to get stuff in jersey or conneticut.


and if you have any friends/relatives in NYC who are smokers - a few cartons may be a good present :)

[whitak24]

the interesting thing is that they always pass these bills with the justification being that it will "discourage smoking". yet they also allocate all the extra money to balance budget problems or to pay for new programs.

obviously, if the new taxes caused smoking to decrease, then they wouldn't have EXTRA revenue. which means that they actually know most people won't quit smoking (demand for cigs is relatively inelastic) and they are, in fact, balancing their budget on the backs of smokers.

which isn't necessarily wrong, it just means that they're less interested in public health and more interested in revenue

[Speedfreak]

It's sad if people would still buy cigarettes instead of buying things to kick the addiction.

[ribitch]

i like how canadians approach smoking. plaster pictures of cancer ridden lungs and brain tumors all over the package. If they still want to smoke, then charge them up the arse for the smokes.

I think smoking should be totally outlawed. Have you ever thought about how many cigarettes/cigars/pipes are smoked daily? Think about the polution that it is responsible for.

[sbp]

Damn nanny government. If they want to outlaw cigarette smoking, go ahead and outlaw it. Stop fooling around like this and stop saying they are raising taxes for health reasons. These politicians won't because they are just as addicted to cigarettes as smokers are {politicians like all the moola from the taxes).

[ufcrusher]

Personally I think its a bunch of crap. If people want to smoke, let them smoke. The government has gone too far with this crap. I mean come on, it would be a good thing to get rid of all the freaking politicians too. They pollute the air, cause illness, and are like a cancer. Lets tax the fruck out of politicans now!

For crying out loud what the hell is the country coming to?

BTW I am NOT a smoker. I just think this is government run amock.

[Speedfreak]

Originally posted by ufcrusher
Personally I think its a bunch of crap. If people want to smoke, let them smoke.

I would agree with you if they did it in privacy, like their house. If it in no way affected me, then I would totally agree with you. That is just not possible.

[MJordanash]

I'm glad the prices went up. Hopefully it does get people to quit.

[WhiskeyPapa]

Originally posted by faither
If you charged $50 a pack you still probably wouldn't recover all the money that's spent on smoking-related illnesses.
Yes, your government school indoctrination has been quite successful.

[sbp]

No news linkage. :/

[johnnymk]

Imagine a family where both the husband and wife are both smoking a pack per day in NYC.
They will be spending $5,000 per year for their habit.

[PoloM1]

I wonder if this will have an effect on the prison systems in NY....:heh:

[faither]

Originally posted by kb0wwp

Yes, your government school indoctrination has been quite successful.

It's not a government school propaganda -- and I don't believe that another tax dollar should go to pay for more gov't cheese and pork pet projects -- but rather the cost to society for providing care to those with smoking-related illnesses couldn't be recovered no matter how much you taxed the product. If you were to try to recover the cost, no one would be able to afford it. Maybe that's not a bad idea but then you'd need to increase subsidies to tobacco farmers to appease all the southern gentlemen who run Congress. It's a vicious cycle.