Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihu1g.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!vax135!houxz!houxm!ihnp4!ihu1g!fish
From: fish@ihu1g.UUCP (Bob Fishell)
Newsgroups: net.misc,net.med
Subject: Re: Why Smoke?
Message-ID: <439@ihu1g.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 20-Jun-84 09:27:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihu1g.439
Posted: Wed Jun 20 09:27:21 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 21-Jun-84 07:21:25 EDT
References: <3045@brl-tgr.ARPA>, <332@ames-lm.UUCP> <3055@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 17

Anti-smoking legislation has less chance of passage than just increasing
the taxes on it even more.  I'd favor a $2.00/pack Federal nuisance tax
on cigarettes, in addition to the already exhorbitant taxes on them now.
The tax would be collected by the manufacturer, and would only filter
(pun unintentional) down to the consumer through the usual chain of 
middlemen.  This would reduce black-marketeering.

The money collected could be used to fund cancer research and go toward
anti-smoking information campaigns.  The large price of cigarettes would
induce more people to stop, discourage young people from starting (when
I was a kid, I had to be frugal with my allowance.  Unfortunately, cigs
were $0.35 a pack then, and I smoked 'em), and put the burden of public
expense for smoking on the people who cause the problem.
-- 

                               Bob Fishell
                               ihnp4!ihu1g!fish