If we can, I would be interested in seeing a polite, nonpolitical discussion on this one:
http://ultoday.com/node/3940
If we can, I would be interested in seeing a polite, nonpolitical discussion on this one:
http://ultoday.com/node/3940
Moronic grandstanding for future "hard-line Republican" ambitions.
(I kept it as civil as possible.)
No new taxes
igeaux.mobi
I know it's a fine line to draw b/w taxing something that seems to be a negative, but I think cigarettes should be the exception. U never have to pay the tax if u don't want. Lung cancer kills 3x more than any other cancer. Smokers are risk pooled with every other health insurance client Less smokers equals lower private insurance, or at least it should.
igeaux.mobi
excellent points, imo. also, studies prove that the higher the cost of a pack, the lower the numberof new smokers who will begin smoking, read: children. as to your last point, add: fewer health poblems for the elderly that we pay for in the form of medicaid in this state.
If you reduce a tax in one place, you must find another source of income to replace that money. No government will reduce their spending to compensate. They will sneak in a tax somewhere else or cut funding for something (read education) to make up for the loss.
However this is all a non issue because his veto will be overturned by the state legislature.
Like brockmeaux said, grandstanding.
Veto override failed in the Legislature.
Explain to me again how this was a new tax? Wouldn't a new tax that didn't get passed not affect the budget?
Terrible job Bobby.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)